Pooja Gurnani W/O Jitesh ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 6665 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

                 D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12745/2021

Pooja Gurnani W/o Jitesh Jaithnandani, Aged About 31 Years,
R/o Jaipur 112/394 Agarwal Farm Mansarovar, Jaipur
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
1.      State Of Rajasthan, Through The Chief Secretary, Govt.
        Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur
2.      State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary,
        Home      Department,         Govt.      Of    Rajasthan,     Secretariat,
        Jaipur
3.      Director General Of Police, Police Headquarters, Tonk
        Road, Jaipur
4.      Additional Director General Of Police, Police Housing,
        Police Headquarters, Tonk Road, Jaipur
                                                                  ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Amitosh Pareek
For Respondent(s)          :

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Judgment

18/11/2021

This public interest litigation is filed by an individual.

She has challenged a circular dated 25.10.2021 issued by the

Additional Director of Police, Jaipur. We have read and re-read the

circular which the petitioner has challenged. In this circular, the

said authority has referred to certain activities which have come to

the notice of the administration taking place in the police stations.

The circular also records that Rajasthan Religious Building & Places

Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred as "Act of 1954") prohibits use of

(2 of 3) [CW-12745/2021]

public places for religious purposes. The circular also records that

besides, in the public buildings of the police stations, there is no

provision for construction of places for offering prayers. With this

preamble all that this circular provides is that the concerned

persons should ensure that the provisions of the Act of 1954 are

scrupulously followed by the police officials and other employees.

Reading the entire circular as a whole would show that

the first paragraph contents of which we have noted in the earlier

portion of the order, are in the nature of preamble. The operative

portion is in the last paragraph in which, as noted above all that

the authority issuing the circular desires is that the provisions of

the Act of 1954 should be implemented scrupulously by all

concerned. We don't see how the petitioner can be said to be

aggrieved by this circular.

We notice that besides challenging the circular, in

relation to the provisions of the Act of 1954, the petitioner has

made following prayer:-

(c) "Direct the respondents to include the definition of Government institutions/state Bodies under the Act of 1954 as the Police Stations and other Government buildings are not being covered under the definition of "Public Places" under the Act of 1954".

Under this prayer thus the petitioner seeks a direction

to include certain portion in the definition contained in the act. As

is well settled through series of judgments, no direction can be

issued to the legislature to frame a law in particular manner.

Prayer (c) therefore in any case cannot be granted. It is not the

case of the petitioner that any of the provisions of the act are

ultravires the constitution.

(3 of 3) [CW-12745/2021]

As long as provisions of the Act stand, the petitioner

cannot raise any objection to the government authority issuing a

circular that the provisions of the Act be implemented.

Petition is dismissed.

                                    (REKHA BORANA),J                                                       (AKIL KURESHI),CJ

                                   P.C. Gupta/B.M. Gandhi-13









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)