Supreme Court Removes Blanket Ban Imposed on Social Functions in Sisodia Rani ka Bagh by the NGT in 2014

Must Read

Bombay High Court Allows Export of Pending Consignment of Onions in Respect of Which Shipping Bills Have Been Generated Before Notification of the Ban

A writ petition challenging the notification dated 14th September 2020 to ban the export of onions was filed by...

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding...

Delhi HC: Language of Statement and Testimony of Complainant Need Not Be Identical

A single-judge bench of J. Vibhu Bakhru of the Delhi High Court upheld the accused's conviction in Kailash @...

COVID Results Shall Be Conveyed To the Person Within 24 Hours: Delhi High Court

The order has come in a writ petition moved by Rakesh Malhotra. The Petitioner herein seeks to ramp up...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside the Order of the Trial Court in the Chief Secretary Assault Case

In the case of Mr. Arvind Kejriwal & Anr. V. State NCT of Delhi, Mr.Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an...

Follow us

On 11.05,2020, the Supreme Court ordered the removal of the blanket ban on conducting any event in the Sisodia Rani ka Bagh. The National Green Tribunal, Central Zone, Bhopal had earlier banned the conduction of event in 2014.

Facts of the Case

The “Sisodia Rani ka Bagh” is a Historical Monument. The monument was used for ceremonial purposes like marriage. Subsequently, in 2012, the Department of Art, Literature, Culture, and Archaeology declared it as a ‘protected monument’. Thus, supervision was transferred from the Rajasthan General Development Department to the Department of Archaeological and Museums. Later, on 7.6.2012, the Department issued a notification. It contained restrictions on the conduct of the ceremonies.

Aggrieved thereby, the respondents filed a writ petition in the Rajasthan High Court. The High Court of Rajasthan transferred the matter to the NGT. The petition was for the restrain imposed on the use of the monument for ceremonial purposes. However, the Tribunal declared the monument is part of the forest area. Further, it denied permission for organizing any special functions. It also denied permission for the use of fireworks, loud music in the Monument. Implidely, there is a blanket ban on the usage of the monument.

Therefore, the appeal has been filed before the Supreme Court against the order of the Tribunal.

Arguments of the Appellant

The counsel for the appellants argued that a blanket ban on ceremonies in the monument was not justified. He submitted the following reasons:

Prohibition would adversely affect the state’s tourism. It would render the monument useless affecting its upkeep. Further, the location of the monument was ideal for holding such ceremonies. The monument’s history of holding such ceremonies attracted tourists. Moreover, it earned significant revenue for the state’s exchequer in the process.

The original application only asked for restrictions that would avoid disturbance to wildlife. Further, specific guidelines were already in place. Hence, more restrictions could be issued instead of a blanket ban.

Arguments of the Respondents

The respondent no.1- Ashish Gautam filed a writ before the High Court of Rajasthan. This Public Interest Litigation asked the Court to issue directions to protect wildlife in the area. Since this is a reserve forest area, it asked for restrictions on the use of laser lights, loud music, and fireworks in the monument.

He supported the order of the Tribunal, arguing that the restrained activities were not allowed in the forest area. Further, it was listed with the Forest Department. He stated that the notification issued on 05.02.2012 declared it as a protected monument. He submitted that conservation and restoration were bound by the same.

Observations of the Court 

The Court observed the following:

  1. The monument is open for use between 8:00 A.M to 8:00 P.M. No activity after 8:00 P.M.
  2. The use of laser lights, loud music, and fireworks is not allowed.
  3. Staff to maintain musical and other fountains in working order.
  4. Follow the conditions imposed by the Department.
  5. Appoint supervisory staff and gardeners to maintain the area.
  6. Further, prepare and place on record a beautification and horticulture development project.

Court’s Decision

The bench of Justice Arun Mishra and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat partly allowed the appeal. They proposed to supervise the beautification process themselves. The Court directed the consultant to submit a plan within one month from the date of order.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

Latest News

Bombay High Court Allows Export of Pending Consignment of Onions in Respect of Which Shipping Bills Have Been Generated Before Notification of the Ban

A writ petition challenging the notification dated 14th September 2020 to ban the export of onions was filed by the Exporters Association before the...

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding that mens rea is an...

Delhi HC: Language of Statement and Testimony of Complainant Need Not Be Identical

A single-judge bench of J. Vibhu Bakhru of the Delhi High Court upheld the accused's conviction in Kailash @ Balli v State. The bench...

COVID Results Shall Be Conveyed To the Person Within 24 Hours: Delhi High Court

The order has come in a writ petition moved by Rakesh Malhotra. The Petitioner herein seeks to ramp up testing facilities in Delhi.   Facts of...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside the Order of the Trial Court in the Chief Secretary Assault Case

In the case of Mr. Arvind Kejriwal & Anr. V. State NCT of Delhi, Mr.Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has set aside the 24.07.2019 Order...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an order restraining the manufacturing, marketing,...

NGT Red-Flags Kaleshwaram Project: Green Clearance Violated the Law, Halt Work

Excerpt The National Green Tribunal (NGT), Principal Bench, dated 20th October 2020, directed the Telangana government to stop all work, except the drinking water component...

There Can Be No Leniency Shown To Appellant Who Pleaded To Reduce Sentence: Delhi High Court

Facts On 25.2.2016 the victim’s sister who was 13 years old was present with her sister who was 2 years old (victim) at their home....

Violation of Executive Instructions Cannot Be Sole Ground to Invalidate Transfer Orders: Tripura High Court

In Dr Bithika Choudhury vs the State of Tripura & Ors., a Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice S. Talapatra and Hon’ble Justice S.G. Chattopadhyay...

Case Regarding Anticipatory Bail, Applicant May Be Released Imposing Suitable Conditions: Gujarat High Court

A Single-Judge Bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Dr Justice A.P. Thakur had been hearing submissions of the Applicant to release him...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -