A Growing Concern Within Educational Institutions

In recent years, educational institutions across India—ranging from universities and colleges to schools and hostels—have increasingly reported incidents involving stray dogs roaming freely within their campuses. While the presence of animals in public spaces is not uncommon in Indian cities, the unchecked movement of stray dogs inside educational premises has emerged as a serious safety, health, and administrative concern.

Taking cognizance of this growing issue, the University Grants Commission (UGC) has issued a nationwide advisory to all higher educational institutions, directing them to take immediate and structured steps to prevent stray dogs from entering campuses, while simultaneously ensuring compliance with animal welfare laws.

The advisory follows guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court of India, which emphasized the need to balance human safety, student welfare, and animal protection in public institutions.

Background: Rising Incidents Trigger Regulatory Action

Multiple incidents reported from different parts of the country—especially in urban campuses—have brought this issue to the forefront. Students, faculty members, and non-teaching staff have complained about:

• Dog bites and chasing incidents,

• Fear and anxiety among students, particularly in hostels and libraries,

• Hygiene and sanitation issues,

• Disruption of academic activities,

• Safety risks during early morning and late-night hours.

In some unfortunate cases, students and staff have sustained injuries, prompting institutions to seek clarity on how to act without violating animal protection laws.

Courts, regulatory bodies, and animal welfare organizations have repeatedly stressed that arbitrary removal or cruelty towards stray animals is illegal, but at the same time, institutions have a duty of care towards students and employees.

UGC’s Nationwide Directive: What the Advisory Says

The UGC advisory, circulated to universities, autonomous colleges, and affiliated institutions across India, makes it clear that educational campuses cannot remain passive spectators to the problem.

The Commission has instructed institutions to take preventive, humane, and lawful measures to ensure that stray dogs do not roam freely inside academic premises.

The advisory explicitly refers to Supreme Court directions dated 7 November, which underline that:

• Human safety cannot be compromised,

• Animal welfare laws must be respected,

• Institutional accountability is non-negotiable.

Mandatory Formation of Animal Welfare Committees

One of the key directions in the advisory is the mandatory establishment of Animal Welfare Committees in higher educational institutions.

Purpose of the Committee

These committees are intended to:

• Coordinate with local municipal corporations,

• Liaise with district animal welfare officers,

• Monitor stray dog population on campus,

• Ensure compliance with animal welfare norms,

• Implement humane solutions rather than ad-hoc or violent actions.

Composition

Typically, such committees are expected to include:

• A senior administrative officer (Nodal Officer),

• Representatives from the local civic body,

• Veterinary experts or animal welfare representatives,

• Campus security officials.

This structured approach ensures that decisions are institutional, transparent, and legally defensible.

Role of Local Authorities and Municipal Bodies

The UGC advisory clearly states that educational institutions cannot act in isolation. They are required to:

• Inform and coordinate with municipal corporations or local governing bodies,

• Seek assistance for sterilization, vaccination, and relocation where permissible,

• Ensure proper documentation of actions taken.

Local bodies are responsible under municipal laws for:

• Animal birth control (ABC) programs,

• Anti-rabies vaccination,

• Handling aggressive or diseased animals.

Educational institutions must act as facilitators, not enforcement agencies.

Supreme Court’s Position: Balancing Rights and Responsibilities

The Supreme Court of India has consistently held that:

• Stray dogs are protected under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960,

• Arbitrary killing, poisoning, or relocation is illegal,

• At the same time, public safety and human life are paramount.

In multiple orders, the Court has clarified that:

• Stray animals cannot be allowed to become a threat to human safety,

• Educational institutions have the right to regulate access to their premises,

• Reasonable restrictions to prevent animals from entering sensitive areas such as classrooms, laboratories, hostels, and libraries are permissible.

The Court has emphasized regulated management, not negligence or cruelty.

Campus Safety: Students at the Center of the Issue

Educational campuses are meant to be safe spaces for learning and personal development. The presence of aggressive or unregulated stray dogs has raised concerns among:

• Female students returning late from libraries,

• Hostellers moving within campus at night,

• Parents worried about their children’s safety,

• Faculty members commuting early mornings.

Several student bodies have formally petitioned administrations, highlighting that fear and insecurity directly affect:

• Attendance,

• Academic concentration,

• Mental well-being.

The UGC advisory recognizes that student welfare is central and cannot be subordinated to administrative indecision.

Hygiene, Health, and Public Sanitation Concerns

Apart from safety, stray dogs inside campuses raise public health concerns, including:

• Risk of rabies,

• Spread of infections,

• Waste scattering,

• Contamination of food areas and hostels.

Under public health regulations, institutions are responsible for:

• Maintaining hygienic surroundings,

• Preventing disease vectors,

• Ensuring sanitation within campus limits.

Failure to act may expose institutions to legal liability, including negligence claims.

What Institutions Are Directed to Do

The UGC advisory outlines a multi-pronged action plan:

1. Campus Security Measures

• Restrict entry points,

• Improve fencing and boundary walls,

• Monitor vulnerable areas through security staff.

2. Awareness and Sensitization

• Conduct awareness programs for students and staff,

• Educate communities about humane treatment and safety protocols,

• Discourage feeding stray animals inside campus without authorization.

3. Designation of Nodal Officers

• Appoint a responsible officer to coordinate with authorities,

• Maintain records of complaints and actions taken,

• Act as a single point of accountability.

4. Reporting and Compliance

Institutions are required to:

• Submit compliance reports to the UGC,

• Follow a prescribed reporting format,

• Demonstrate implementation of guidelines.

Animal Welfare Perspective: Humane Solutions Only

Animal welfare organizations have welcomed the advisory, noting that it:

• Rejects violent or illegal actions,

• Encourages sterilization and vaccination,

• Promotes structured solutions rather than reactionary measures.

Experts emphasize that unmanaged feeding, lack of sterilization, and poor waste management are key reasons for the growth of stray dog populations near campuses.

The solution lies in:

• Scientific population control,

• Community participation,

• Responsible waste disposal.

Legal Framework Governing the Issue

The issue of stray dogs intersects with multiple laws:

• Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960

• Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules

• Municipal laws and by-laws

• Supreme Court and High Court rulings

• UGC Act and Regulations

Institutions that act without following due process risk:

• Contempt of court,

• Criminal liability,

• Civil suits,

• Regulatory action by UGC.

Hence, compliance is not optional.

Why This Advisory Matters Nationwide

India has one of the largest networks of educational institutions in the world, hosting millions of students. The issue of stray animals is not limited to one state or city—it is pan-India.

By issuing a centralized advisory:

• UGC has provided clarity,

• Reduced confusion among administrators,

• Created a uniform national approach,

• Reinforced the principle of lawful governance.

Challenges in Implementation

Despite clear guidelines, challenges remain:

• Lack of coordination with municipal bodies,

• Resource constraints in rural institutions,

• Resistance from animal rights activists in some areas,

• Administrative delays.

However, experts argue that inaction is no longer defensible, especially where student safety is compromised.

The Way Forward

A sustainable solution requires:

• Cooperation between institutions, local authorities, and animal welfare groups,

• Data-driven monitoring,

• Regular audits,

• Sensible campus design,

• Clear accountability.

Educational institutions must recognize that safe campuses and humane animal management are not mutually exclusive.

Conclusion

The UGC’s advisory on preventing stray dogs in educational institutions marks an important step toward ensuring safety, legality, and compassion. By aligning with Supreme Court directions, the Commission has reinforced the idea that governance in education must be responsible, proactive, and humane.

As institutions begin implementing these measures, the focus must remain on:

• Protecting students and staff,

• Respecting animal welfare laws,

• Maintaining academic sanctity.

The message is clear: educational campuses must be safe, orderly, and law-compliant—without cruelty and without negligence.