Thakur Nahar Singh Jasol vs State of Rajasthan

Shethna, J.—Thakur Nahar Singh Jasol, Chief Administrator of the City Palace Museum (Maharana Mewar Charitable Foundation) Udaipur addressed a letter dated 18.11.1999 to Hon''ble Justice Vishnu Sadashiv Kokje, Judge, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur alongwith a copy of application dated NIL submitted by as many as nine applicants to the District Collector, Banner and a copy of the letter dated 12.10.1999 addressed to Shri R.N. Arvind, I.A.S. Collector, Disirict Barmer.

We fine from the noting made on mis petition that as per the orders, it was listed in Chamber on 22.11.1999.

On 22.11.1999 their Lordships V.S. Kokje and Mohd. Yamin, JJ. passed the following order in chamber:-

22.11.1999

HON''BLE MR. V.S. KOKJE, J.

HON''BLE MR. MOHD. YAMIN, J.

(IN CHAMBER)

Perused the papers.

In our opinion, it is a fit case for being entertained as Public Interest Litigation.

Issue notice to the Collector of District Barmer as also to Thakur Ganga Singh Jasol, owner of Survey No. 116, village Tenlawas, Thakur Sobhagya Singh Jasol, survey No. 216/31, Shri Moolchand Rathi Jasol, Proprietor of Universal Dyeing, Shri Rameshwar Bhootra Jasol, owner of Annapurna Textile Pvt. Ltd., Shri Ashok Jain Jasol, Proprietor of Monica Textile, Shri Devraj Nahata Jasol, proprietor Nahata Textile, calling upon them to show cause as to why action to redress the grievance of the petitioner be not taken and interim orders be also not issued. Notices returnable within four weeks."

Only Collector, Barmer has filed reply affidavit. In view of the reply affidavit nothing more is required to be done and accordingly, it was required to be disposed of.

However, before parting, we must stale that mere is growing tendency among the people of the State to address letters directly to the Hon''ble Judges of this Court with a request either to treat the matter as Public Interest Litigation or to do justice to them and the registry is directed to place the matter before the court on judicial side.

We do not approve this practice. If any person has any legitimate grievance then he or she should address a letter or application only to the Hon''ble Chief Justice of this Court. Those cases should only be entertained provided the Hon''ble Chief Justice thinks it fit to place it on a judicial side treating it as a writ petition or a public interest litigation matter.

We must also state that in some cases the parties can easily afford to approach this Court either in person or through their counsel by way of proper writ petition, but instead of that this device is found ou! to address letters or applications to Hon''ble Judges of this Court with a request to entertain it as a writ petition or public interest litigation matter. In number of cases, we have found that no public interest was involved and it was only a private dispute between the parties. This is one of those cases.

We wound like to reproduce the typed application dated 18.11.1999 addressed by Thakur Nahar Singh Jasol to the Hon''ble Judge of this Court, which is as under:-

18 uoEcj] 1999

ekuuh; U;k;ewfrZ]

Jheku fo".kq lnkf''k dksdts

jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky;

tks/kiqjA

ekU;oj]

;g izkFkZuk i= esa Jheku dh lsok esa d"V fuokj.k gsrq izLrqr dj jgk gawA fo".kq vkSj f''koth nksuksa dh iqkdj lqudj] nzfor gksdj nkSM+s vkrs gSaA Jheku esjh iqdkj lh/kh var% dj.k ls gSA fQj fo".kq vkSj f''ko nksuksa vki esa gh fojkteku gSaA vr% ''kh/zk d"V fuokj.k dh vk''kk ls ;g i= Jheku~ dks izsf"kr djus dh n`"Vrk dj jgk gwaA

Lora= Hkkjr esa tks dkuwu ds nk;js es pyrk gS og dLV mBkrk gS vkSj tks dkuwu vius gkFk esa ys ysrk gS og ekSt djrk gSA

;g dgka dk U;k; gS] Jheku\\

nksuksa gkFk ilkj dj eSa U;k; dh iqdkj vki rd igqapkuk pkgrk gwaA ;fn var% dj.k ls vki ;g le>s fd esjh iqdkj lgh gS rks gh vki bl ij dksbZ dk;Zokgh djkosa vU;Fkk ughaA

�1� esjs {ks= esa y?kq m|ksxks ls gks jgs ty&iznw"k.k dh leL;k ls ge dk''rdkjksa dks tks uqdlku gks jgk gS ml vkSj ftyk/kh''k egksn; ckM+esj dks i= fy[kdj ;g fuosnu fd;k Fkk fd d`i;k vki gekjh lgk;rk djkosaA�izfr layXu�

�2� ftyk/kh''k ckM+esj us ty iznw"ku fu;a=.k foHkkx tks/kiqj dks esjk izkFkZuk i= Hkstdj mudh fjiksVZ ekaxhA

�3� ty iznw"k.k fu;a=.k foHkkx }kjk ,d ny losZ{k.k gsrq vk;k o ikuh ds uewus ysdj pyk x;kA

�4� mlds ckjs esa iz''kklu ''kkar gks x;kA

�5� eSaus ,d i= ftyk/kh''k dks iqu% fy[kdj fuosnu fd;k fd vkidk tks Hkh fu.kZ; gks d`i;k lwfpr djsa rkfd vkxs ge U;k; dhj ''kj.k ys ldsaA�izfryhih layXu� ijUrq vkt fn rd dksbZ m�kj ftyk/kh''k dk;kZy; ls ugha feykA u gh mu m|ksxksa ds f[kykQ dksbZ dk;Zokgh vkt rd dh xbZA

�6� blds iwoZ esa lu~ 1996&97 esa tc eSa iapk;r lfefr ckyksrjk dk iz/kku Fkk] ml le; ftyk/kh''k egksn; ckM+esj dk /;ku lnu dh ekQZr bl leL;k dh vksj vkdf"kZr fd;k Fkk ftlesa LFkkuh; fo/kk;d egksn; us Hkh iw.kZ lg;ksx dk vk''oklu fn;k FkkA �izLrko dh izfrfyfi layXu�

�7� bl leL;k ds fuokj.k gsrq mPp U;k;k; ,oa mPpre U;k;ky; ds vusd fu.kZ; gks pqds gSa ijUrq fQj Hkh iz''kklu bu voS/k dke djus okyksa ls D;ksa ?kcjkrk gS] dqN le> esa ugh vkrkA

�8� gekjs dq, fiNys dbZ o"kksZa ls fu"dh; iM+s gSaA th ugha ekurk] blfy, bu ij dk''kr djrs Hkh gSa rks tehu [kjkc gks tkrh gS ,oa ftruk iSlk yxk dj [ksrh esa [kpZ djrs gSa mruk okil ugha feyrkA vkfFkZd gkfu ds lkFk ekufld ihM+k Hkh gj le; cuh jgrh gSA

ge ej ej dj th jgs gSa ij gekjh iqdkj luus okyk dksbZ ughaA

dgka tk,sa\\

fdldks iqdkjsa\\

;g ,d foMEcuk gSA

ekuuh; U;k;ewfrZ

bl nnZ Hkjh iqdkj dks ;fn vki mfpr le>rs gSa rks gesa U;k; nhft;s dsoy U;k; mlds flok; gesa dqN ugha pkfg;s vkSj U;k; ekaxuk gekjk tUe fla� vf/kdkj gS nsa ;k u ns ;g loZFkk vki ij fuHkZj gSA

fouhr

g-

�Bk- ukgjflag tlksy�

Alongwith the aforesaid application, there is an application dated NIL addressed by as many as nine applicants including none else but Shri Jaswant Singh, Hon''ble Foreign Minister of Union of India, his cousin Shri Doongar Singh, Advocate, Jodhpur, Retired Lt. Gen. Hanoot Singh and Shri Fateh Singh, I.A.S., Addl. Chief Secretary of State of Gujarat alongwith others to District Collector, Barmer for taking action against six opponents named in this application.

It is true that the said application dated NIL was only signed by Nahar Singh Jasol and the same was made on behalf of nine applicants named in it. However, the contents of the application shows that all those nine persons were individually affected by the acts of opponents mentioned in it.

Thus, in strict sense, it is not a public interest litigation but private interest of number of persons is involved in this matter.

We are of the considered opinion that if they had got any legitimate grievance then without any hesitation they should approach this Court by way of writ petition, but we do not approve this attempt on the part of petitioner-Thakur Nahar Singh Jasol to address a direct letter to one of the Hon''ble Judges of this Court.

With these observations, this petition is disposed of.