Rituraj Singh Rathore vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 7421 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 115/2022

Rituraj Singh Rathore S/o Sawai Singh Rathore, Aged About 32 Years, R/o - 371, Marg 19, B Road, New Bjs Colony, Jodhpur

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, State Of Rajasthan, Environment Department, Jaipur.

2. Principal Chief Conservator Of Forests, (Hoff), Aranya Bhawan, Jhalana Institutional Area, Jaipur

3. The Additional Principal Chief Forest Conservator And Chief Wildlief Warden, Aranya Bhawan, Jhalana Institutional Area, Jaipur

4. Deputy Conservator Of Forest, Wildlife, Rajsamand

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ritu Raj Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

Judgment

18/05/2022

Heard.

The Review petition has been filed by the petitioner on the

submission that though specific shortcomings have been brought

to the notice of the Court in the petition seriously disputing the

State's stand in the affidavit regarding sufficiency of staff,

equipments it is wrongly recorded that there is no serious dispute.

He would submit that he has seriously disputed the State's

contention but the petition has been disposed of without giving

further directions reserving liberty to point out further deficiencies

(2 of 3) [WRW-115/2022]

or short comings to authorities who would ensure to look into the

same and take such measure as found necessary.

After hearing learned counsel for petitioner and going

through record, we find that even from the reply of the State

number of shortcomings with regard to staff, equipments and

other necessity required for proper maintenance of forest and

wildlife sanctuaries are found lacking. The State's reply itself

shows that there are number of deficiencies, though it is coupled

with the States' statement regarding they managing the affairs in

the wildlife sanctuary and areas referred to in the petition.

The deficiencies with regard to the staff, vehicles,

equipments are reflected from the records. In an ideal situation all

the staff, equipments should be available. However, we cannot

ignore that the availability of staff, equipments and all necessary

things are subject to availability of financial resources at the end

of the State. However, all attempts should be made to make up all

the deficiencies with regard to staff, equipments and other things

which are necessary in accordance with State's own forest policy

for proper management and maintenance of forest and wildlife

particularly those which have been referred to in the petition.

In view of the above, instead of keeping this matter pending

we are inclined to dispose of the petition directing the State

authorities including forest authorities to ensure to take all

necessary possible steps, as early as possible, towards completion

of the staff deficiency, equipments deficiency and other necessary

infrastructure including vehicles to ensure that there is proper

management and maintenance in the matter of wildlife protection

and preservation activities carried out by the forest department in

sanctuaries of Kumbhalgarh and Todgarh. A copy of this order

(3 of 3) [WRW-115/2022]

shall be submitted before the State Government in the

Department through the secretary of the Forest Department. The

Secretary of the forest Department is directed to issue necessary

directions to all concerned. A periodic assessment of the progress

with regard to fulfillment of alleged deficiencies shall be carried

out every three months for one year that means for next four

periodic intervals. After one year, a report shall be published by

the Department of Forest in the State of Rajasthan with regard to

the steps taken by them towards fulfillment of the deficiencies

relating to staff, infrastructure, equipments, vehicle etc. The same

should be placed in public domain so that the petitioner have

access to those information. Thereafter, if need arises, in view of

the liberty which has already been granted by this Court,

petitioner can bring this to the notice of the authority and if

necessary also this Court for further directions.

The review petition is disposed of.

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACJ

11-nidhi/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)