JUDGMENT : Munishwar Nath Bhandari, J. Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the third respondent from in any way giving away cows donated to Hindu temples by the devotees either on sale or by donation for any reason. 1. The writ petition has been filed seeking to forbear the third respondent from giving away the cows donated to Hindu temples by the devotees either on sale or by donation for any reason. 2. The petitioner - appearing in person submits that a Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.218 Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments (RE 1-1) Department dated 06.9.2013 has been issued for regulating the donated cows given to organizations so as to avoid slaughter of cows. As per the Government Order, the donated cows can be redonated only when they are milking cows and not otherwise. It is the apprehension of the petitioner that the respondents are now permitting redonation of the non milking cows also, which is against the said Government Order. 3. The petitioner has made a reference to paragraph 4(vii) of the said Government Order to indicate that redonation is permitted only if they are milking cows. The petitioner submits that the direction as sought for may be granted. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions of the petitioner and perused the records. 5. We find that pursuant to the decision of the First Bench of this Court in the case of In Defence of Environment and Animals rep.by its Managing Trustee Elephant G.Rajendran Vs. Commissioner, HR & CE Department, Chennai-34 [W.P. No.27373 of 2008 dated 19.3.2009], the Government issued order dated 6.9.2013. The said Government Order permits donation or redonation of cattle. In view of the above, donation or redonation of the cattle cannot be held to be illegal, if it is undertaken as per the directions given in the order of this Court and the Government Order. The relevant paragraphs of the judgment in the case supra are quoted as hereunder: “3. The Government has taken initiatives in this behalf and a report has been filed by the respondent, which was affirmed on 06.1.2009. The relevant paragraphs of the judgment in the case supra are quoted as hereunder: “3. The Government has taken initiatives in this behalf and a report has been filed by the respondent, which was affirmed on 06.1.2009. In paragraph 6 of the report, it is recorded that a meeting was convened by the Government in this behalf and the Minister for HR & CE and the Minister for Animal Husbandry along with Senior Officials of the respective Departments had participated. In the meeting, following decisions were taken: (a) After getting the details of goshalas, which are well maintained from the Animal Welfare Board of India, cattles may be sent to these goshalas, only up their capacity. (b) The donated cattles may be given, through the District Collectors, to well maintained religious institutions like Jain Institutions, Hindu Religious Organizations, Maths, Government Recognized Women Self-Help Groups, Organizations, which perform cleaning (Uzhavarapani) services in the temples and to persons, who have received two acres of land free of cost from the Government. (c) The donated cattle may be given free to Archakas and Poosaris of the temples under the control of the HR & CE Department, so that they can use the milk for their temples. (d) steps may be taken to establish integrated cattle forms in Palani, Tiruchendur, Rameswaram, Trichy, Salem, Madurai and Tanjore in the vacant lands of the temples to maintain the cattle there. Green fodder may be developed in these places. Natural fertilizers, medicine, vibuthi, bio-gas and other like products may be prepared from the cattle waste (dung). Action may also be taken to augment income from this. (e) Separate hundials may be installed for receiving donations for the maintenance of goshalas. (f) Retired veterinary doctors may be appointed on contract basis in the temple where cattles are received in large numbers. 4. Mr.Elephant G.Rajendran, the writ petitioner submits that he will be more satisfied if the decision taken by the Government is implemented at the earliest. Therefore, the respondent is directed to issue necessary circular to the goshalas, so that they would act upon the decision within a period of four weeks from the date of this order. 5. The writ petition is disposed of.” 6. The Government Order was passed in pursuance of the judgment supra, which does not make a reference as to donation or redonation of the milking cows only. 5. The writ petition is disposed of.” 6. The Government Order was passed in pursuance of the judgment supra, which does not make a reference as to donation or redonation of the milking cows only. Rather, it is silent on the issue as to whether it is milking cow or non milking cow. 7. The petitioner made a reference to paragraph 4(vii) of the Government Order to show that the donated cows could be used for milk for the temple and therefore, it permits donation of milking cows only. 8. We do not find anything with reference to the said submission. Merely making a reference about use of milk by the temple does not mean that the said Government Order was only for donation or re-donation of milking cows. Therefore, the prayer made by the petitioner cannot be accepted. The action of the respondents is in accordance with the judgment and the Government Order. No direction can be given against the earlier judgment of this Court. 9. Accordingly, finding no substance in the said submissions, the writ petition is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.