DBSAW NO.132/09. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.132/2009. In S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12532/2008. Tiger Eye Adventure Tours Sawaimadhopur & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order : 8/11/2010. PRESENT HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ARUN MISHRA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Lokesh Sharma for the appellants. Shri G.S. Bapna, Advocate General with Shri Venketesh Garg for the State. ****** Per Mr.Justice Mohammad Rafiq This special appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 14/11/2008 by which, writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed. Shri Lokesh Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants has argued that Condition No.11 in the order of Principal Chief Conservator of Forest & Chief Wildlife Warden, Rajasthan Jaipur dated 19/8/2008 laying down guidelines regarding regulation of tourists and vehicles in Ranthambhore National Park is arbitrary and unconstitutional as the same is hit by Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. It takes away the right of livelihood of the approved Guides working in the DBSAW NO.132/09. 2 Sanctuary. Appellant No.1 is Proprietorship firm of appellant No.2, who is an approved Guide. Learned counsel submitted that no restriction can be placed that the Guides should be allocated to the Tourists on the basis of roster of vehicles. It is upto the concerned tourist to decide as to which Guide he would like to carry with him because not every Guide knows how to speak a particular foreign language. Learned counsel submitted that while some Guides may be knowing certain languages but others may not be knowing then, this would create practical difficulty for the tourist. Learned Single Judge erred in law in upholding the validity of Condition No.11. The special appeal therefore be allowed and the impugned judgment and order of the learned Single Judge be set-aside and consequently, writ petition be also allowed declaring the aforesaid condition illegal and ultravires of Article 19 of the Constitution of India. Per contra, Shri G.S. Bapna, learned Advocate General submitted that Condition No.11 is not an onerous condition inasmuch as, this condition has been diluted by subsequent order issued by the same authority on 3/10/2008 by which, it has been provided that if any tourist wanted to take any particular Guide with him, such permission would be granted to him on payment of the prescribed Guide fee and in that event, such additional Guide would be allowed to go with the tourist on the vehicle DBSAW NO.132/09. 3 subject to the condition that Guide allocated to the tourist on the basis of roster, would also accompany him. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusing the material available on record as well as the impugned-order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 14/11/2008, we find that rigour of Condition No.11 has been substantially diluted by the subsequent order dated 3/10/2008, which has given a facility to the tourist to take the Guide of his choice with him subject to payment of prescribed Guide fee. It is upto him whether he takes the Guide allocated to him on the basis of roster system after payment of Guide fee or additional Guide alone. However, Condition No.11 apparently has been imposed with a view to regulating the working of Guides and cannot be said to be unreasonable. Such restriction, in our view, would fall within the broad category of a reasonable restriction. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the impugned judgment & order of the learned Single Judge. This special appeal is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. (ARUN MISHRA), Acting CJ. anil DBSAW NO.132/09. 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R D.B. CIVIL MISC.STAY APPLICATION NO.295/2009. IN D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.132/2009. IN S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.12532/2008. Tiger Eye Adventure Tours Sawaimadhopur & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order : 8/11/2010. PRESENT HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ARUN MISHRA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Lokesh Sharma for the applicant-appellants. Shri G.S. Bapna, Advocate General with Shri Venketesh Garg for the State. ****** Per Mr.Justice Mohammad Rafiq Consequent upon dismissal of the appeal, this stay application does not survive and the same is accordingly rejected. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. (ARUN MISHRA), Acting CJ. anil