Citizens Protection Society vs The State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 1329 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

              D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6930/2021

Citizens   Protection   Society,       Society       Registered     Under    The
Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958, Through Its President
Shri Kaustubh Dadhich Son Of Shri Ratan Chandra, Age About 49
Years, Resident Of 33, Ganga Path, Ito Colony, Suraj Nagar
West, Civil Lines, Jaipur-302006
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.     The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Chief Secretary,
       Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.     The Commissioner, Jaipur Heritage Nagar Nigam, Behind
       Hawa Mahal, Jaipur.
3.     Commissioner, Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur.
4.     Deputy Commissioner, Traffic Police, Jaipur, Yaadgar,
       Ajmeri Gate, M.i. Road, Jaipur.
5.     Rajasthan Pollution Control Board, 4 Jhalana Institutional
       Area, Jhalana Doongri, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Its
       Member Secretary.
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.B. Mathur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Amit Malani, through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Mehta, AAG and Sr. Advocate with Mr. Yashodhar Pandey through VC Mr. M.F. Baig, through VC Mr. Mihir Katta, through VC

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Judgment

07/02/2022

In this public interest petition, the petitioner has made a

prayer that the respondents should be directed not to allow any

parking on the road outside Masala Chowk to Albert Hall Circle

(2 of 2) [CW-6930/2021]

(Museum) Jaipur and further to restrain the respondents from

permitting any parking on the road area.

The list of respondents would show that the same inclue the

State Government, Commissioner, Jaipur Heritage, Commissioner,

Jaipur Development Authority, Deputy Commissioner of Traffic

Police and Rajasthan Pollution Control Board. The respondent

No.3-Commissioner, Jaipur Development Authority has filed a

reply indicating that no parking contract has been granted in the

said area and it will be responsibility of respondent No.4-Deputy

Commissioner of Police Traffic to ensure that no parking takes

place on public road.

Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended

that vehicles are allowed to be parked in the said region when

underground government parking facilities is already available and

for which the contract is also awarded.

It is essentially a question of regulating the traffic and to

ensure that vehicles are not parked in non-parking zones. Unless

some overwhelming issues arise, we would not like to go and

issue directions of the nature sought. It is always expected that

state administration performs its functions as per rules and

regulations.

This public interest litigation stands disposed of. All pending

applications also stand disposed of.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J (AKIL KURESHI),CJ

BRIJ MOHAN GANDHI/63

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)