SAW/369/07 1 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.369 of 2007 For Approval and Signature : HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.M.PANCHAL HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHANWAROO KHAN ====================================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ==================================================== Ramesh Nath & Ors. - Appellants Versus State of Rajasthan & ors. - Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : Mr. P.S. Bhati, for the appellants. ====================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.M.PANCHAL and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHANWAROO KHAN Date : 14/08/2007 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.M.PANCHAL) SAW/369/07 2 JUDGMENT The instant appeal is directed against the order dated January 18, 2007 rendered by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition no.561/2006 by which the prayer made by the appellants to set aside the order dated January 21, 2006 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Udaipur directing Inspector Devasthan to submit appropriate report after investigation with reference to FIR No.2 dated January 10, 2006 is over, is refused. This Court has heard Mr. P.S. Bhati, learned counsel for the appellants and considered the documents forming part of the petition. From the record of the case, it is evident that the Assistant Commissioner has directed the Inspector Devasthan to submit necessary report after investigation of FIR No.2 is over. Before coming to this conclusion, the Assistant Commissioner considered the matter in detail which is quite evident from the lengthy order passed by him roughly running into 11 pages. The contention that Inspector Devasthan could not have been directed to take into consideration the report of investigation made by the Police Officer and therefore the relief claimed in the petition should have been granted by the learned Single Judge, cannot be accepted. It is relevant to notice that on the basis of SAW/369/07 3 JUDGMENT inspection made by the respondent No.3, entry of sales of gold ornaments was found to be suspicious. The respondent no.3 i.e. the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Udaipur was not satisfied with the reply given by the appellants, and therefore notice dated December 6, 2005 was issued under Section 49 of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act. It is an admitted position that before any decision was taken by respondent no.3, non-bailable warrants were issued against the appellants and others for selling gold belonging to the trust and for which FIR is already filed. Under the circumstances, the direction given by the respondent no.3 to the Inspector Devasthan that he should submit report after investigation is over, cannot be regarded as arbitrary so as to warrant interference of this Court in the instant appeal. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Court is of the opinion that no case is made out by the learned counsel for the appellants to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge, and therefore the appeal which lacks merits, deserves dismissal. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal fails and is dismissed. [BHANWAROO KHAN ],J. [J.M.PANCHAL],ACTG.CJ. Praveen