// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6256/2008 with S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Stay Application No.1305/2008 Siddique Khan S/o Shri Azeem Khan Versus The State of Rajasthan and Others Date of Order ::: 18.09.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Sohan Lal Sharma, Counsel for petitioner Shri H.V. Nandwana, Government Counsel and Shri Sanjay Srivastava, Deputy Government Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Admit. Shri H.V. Nandwana, Government Counsel, appears for the respondents. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 13th November, 2007, passed by the Tourism Officer, Tourism Information Center, Amer, whereby the elephant of the petitioner has been ordered to be removed from rotation. Learned Government Counsel has raised a preliminary objection and submitted that the impugned order has been passed in execution of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8987/2006. // 2 // I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The Division Bench in the above referred writ petition passed the order on 10th October, 2007, which has been reproduced in Para 9 of the writ petition. Para 10 of the order passed by the Division Bench is reproduced as under:- “10. Since according to the reply- affidavit filed by the respondents No.1 to 3, the declaration of 105 elephants has only been made by the elephant owners, though there are in all 119 elephants in the city of Jaipur and Amer, we direct that the immediate action shall be taken by the respondents No.3 and 4 against the owners of those 14 elephants who do not have declaration certificates including the action under Chapter VI of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and the status of the action so taken shall also be informed to the court on the next date by way of an affidavit.” The above order makes it clear that the Division Bench directed the respondents to take immediate action against the owners of those 14 elephants who do not have declaration- certificate including the action under Chapter VI of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. The petitioner falls within those 14 elephants owners against whom action has been taken as per direction of the Division Bench. In these circumstances, I find that the impugned order, issued by the respondents as per direction of the Division Bench, is not called for any // 3 // interference by this Court. It will be open for the petitioner to make appropriate application before the Division Bench in the above referred writ petition for appropriate relief. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands dismissed with no order as to costs. Consequent upon dismissal of the writ petition itself, the stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and the same is also dismissed. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//