The Kerala State Human Rights Commission has ordered a multi-department inquiry into an alleged stray dog protection centre at Kayikkara in the third ward of Anchuthengu grama panchayat, directing local veterinary, police and panchayat authorities to submit their reports within two months.
The inquiry follows a complaint filed by the Kayikkara Congress Koottayma, which raised concerns about the functioning of the facility allegedly being operated by a foreign woman. The commission’s order seeks a comprehensive examination of the shelter and the issues identified by the complainants.
SHRC chairperson Justice Alexander directed the Anchuthengu veterinary doctor, the deputy superintendent of police in Varkala, the station house officer of Anchuthengu police station and the joint director of panchayats to conduct the inquiry. The officials have been asked to submit their findings to the commission within two months.
The order was issued after the commission rejected an earlier report submitted by the secretary of Anchuthengu grama panchayat. The available account does not specify the reasons for rejecting that report, nor does it set out findings that establish wrongdoing at the centre.
The involvement of four departments places the matter across separate areas of local administration. The veterinary department is expected to examine matters connected with the functioning of the dog protection centre, while the police and panchayat authorities will be part of the broader inquiry ordered by the commission. The order does not disclose the specific allegations beyond the concerns raised in the complaint.
Stray animal management is administered through local systems that require coordination between civic authorities, veterinary officials and law-enforcement agencies when complaints involve public safety, animal care or the operation of a facility. In this case, the commission has sought reports from each of those institutional levels before deciding on further action.
The commission will consider the next steps after receiving the reports from the authorities concerned. Until that process is completed, the order represents a direction for inquiry rather than a final finding on the shelter’s operations or the allegations raised against it.
