Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vijay Soni vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 February, 2017
Author: Anjuli Palo
Bench: Anjuli Palo
4
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Writ Petition No : 14924/2016
Vijay Soni
- V/s -
State of M.P. & Ors.
Writ Petition No : 17820/2016
Manish
- V/s -
Union of India & Ors.
Writ Petition No : 17827/2016
Deepak
- V/s -
State of M.P. & Ors.
Writ Petition No : 17829/2016
Association of Unaided CBSE School Society
- V/s -
State of M.P. & Ors.
Writ Petition No : 17849/2016 (PIL)
In reference Suo Motu
- V/s -
State of M.P. & Ors.
Present :Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Menon, Acting Chief Justice
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Anjuli Palo, J.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Rajeshwar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Shri Ravish Agrawal, learned Advocate General alongwith Shri
Swapnil Ganguli, learned GA for the respondents/State.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether approved for reporting: Yes / No.
4
ORDER
01/02/2017 Per : Justice Rajendra Menon, Acting Chief Justice :-
1. The petitioner an advocate practicing in Jabalpur has brought to the notice of this Court in WP No.14924/16 certain facts with regard to closing down of school in the town of Chhindwara and forcibly directing the School Authorities to take students to attend certain functions organised by the Government or statutory or non-
statutory authorities. Inter-alia contending that for attending such official government functions or various other functions organised by the statutory or non-statutory authorities schools cannot be directed to be closed and children compelled to attend the function, this writ petition has been filed in public-interest. Similar assertions are made in the other connected cases which are also listed for analogous hearing being WP Nos. 17820/2016, 17827/2016, 17829/2016 & 17849/2016 and the prayer made in all these petitions are that the government and departmental authorities be prohibited from indulging in such act and from the act under taken as alleged in the writ petitions action be taken against the concerned officers.
2. On notice being issued, the State Government has filed a detailed affidavit and during the course of hearing today, Shri Ravish Agrawal, learned Advocate General invited our attention to the guidelines already issued by the State Government in this regard vide Annexure-R/4 on 8.11.2005, 20.2.2005 and 27.10.14 and points out that instructions have 4 already been issued and it would be ensured that in future these instructions are strictly complied with and deviation from the same if point out to the government shall be taken note of and serious action taken. That apart in para 9 of reply filed by the State Government following the assertions are made with regard to framing of certain guidelines and polices, wherein the State District Administration would be directed as to how powers are to be exercised for the use of private vehicles in such contingencies and in emergent situation :
"9. That, so far as the use of private in such rally/political events is concerned, the State Government is already in a process to frame certain guidelines/policy wherein the District Administration or competent authority as the case may be, may exercise its powers to use private vehicles when there is certain contingency situation, some urgency like law and order situation to control a mob or certain emergent situation due to disaster management and certain programme organised relatable to public awareness or which may have the National/State level importance. Hence, the State Government is already in process to frame such policy. The issue is under consultation with the GAD to reach a logical end."
3. Keeping in view the submissions made by learned Advocate General and taking note of the affidavit filed, for the present we are of the considered view that in future the State Government should ensure that the policies as laid down in Annexure-R/4 collectively filed and dated as 27.2.2014, 18.11.2005 and 22.5.2002 are followed in the letter and spirit and further guidelines as proposed to be framed and indicated in para 9 of the return be framed within a reasonable period preferably within a period of six months. We further direct the State Government that based on the policy already in existence i.e. Annexure-R/4 filed 4 alongwith the return, the same be consolidated and fresh instructions on the same lines be issued to all concerned so that they may take note of the same and ensure their compliance in the future. The guidelines consolidated in nature based on the existing guidelines Annexure-R/4 be issued to all concerned within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Henceforth with regard to the issue in question the respondents are directed to ensure that the undertaking given before this Court and the guidelines already in force would be strictly implemented and violation and breach of the same would be taken note of and against the erring official strict action would be taken. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to point out any breach of this order or the guidelines in future so that the action can be taken against the officer concerned, if required.
4. With the aforesaid, all these petitions stand disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon) (Smt. Anjuli Palo)
Judge Judge