RAJESH KUMAR SAINI S/O. SHRI GHEESA LAL SAINI v. UNION OF INDIA
CW/13973/2019 · 2025-08-28
Sanjeet Purohit, Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 28562 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 28562 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:34529-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13973/2019 Rajesh Kumar Saini S/o. Shri Gheesa Lal Saini, Aged About 41 Years, R/o 20-A, Narain Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus
1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways, Transport Bhavan, 1, Parliament Street, New Delhi.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Chief Secretary, Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Jaipur Development Authority, Through Its Commissioner, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Jaipur.
4. The Collector, Jaipur.
5. The Commissioner Of Police, Police Headquarters, Jaipur.
6. M/s. SHV Energy Pvt. Ltd., 8-2-934, IVth Floor, Super Gas House, SDE Saren Chamber, Road No. 7, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad- 500034 Present Address M/s SHV Super Gas Station, Khasra No. 111/2 (Part-A), Village Brijlalpura, Near New Atish Market, Gopalpura Bye-Pass, Jaipur-
302020. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None Present For Respondent(s) : Ms. Shruti Jain for Mr. Sunil Nath HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT
Order 28/08/2025
1.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.6-M/s SHV Energy Private Limited has vehemently argued that the present Public Interest Litigation (PIL) deserves to be dismissed as the petitioner in this PIL has claimed non-compliance of norms and
[2025:RJ-JP:34529-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-13973/2019] circular relating to highways which would not be applicable in the said area. It is stated that the LPG fuel stations established is at a distance of 6-7 kilometers from the National Highway No.8 which crosses from Jaipur to Ajmer and the fuel station is established after following the guidelines as laid down for the purpose of establishment and as per the approval of the Jaipur Development Authority.
2. No one appears for the petitioner.
3. Keeping in view of the aforesaid contentions, we do not find any reason to further continue with this PIL.
4. The same is accordingly dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(SANJEET PUROHIT),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J GAURAV/AVINASH/50