[2026:RJ-JP:13764-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7585/2025 Prakash Chand Saini S/o Shri Shyam Lal Saini, Aged About 55 Years, Resident of opposite Govt Sardar Senior Secondary School, Ward No. 16, Kotputli, District, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, through Chief Secretary, Government Secretariate, Jaipur 2. Principal Secretary, Department of Local Self Government Secretariate Jaipur. 3. Secretary, Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Government Secretariate Jaipur 4. District Collector, District Kotputli-Behror at Kotputli 5. Director, Department of Local Self-Government, Civil Line Phatak, Jaipur. 6. Chief Town Planner, Rajasthan, Civil Line Phatak Jaipur. 7. Municipal Council, Kotputli, Through Commissioner ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hemant Kumar Sharma HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Order 02/04/2026 1. The present petition has been preferred alleging illegal inclusion of revenue villages in the Municipal Council, Kotputli. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the same is in violation of the Article 243Q of the Constitution of India. He also submits that already there is Master Plan prepared for 2011-2031 for the villages which are included in the Municipal Council, Kotputli. However, vide notification, the new villages which have [2026:RJ-JP:13764-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-7585/2025] been included, would become part of the Master Plan which could not have been done without following the procedure as laid down under Section 162 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 (for short the “Act, 2009”). 3. Learned counsel has invited our attention to the provisions of Section 162 of the Act, 2009, which provide that subsequent modification of the Master Plan after it has come into operation, would be with the prior approval of the State Government and after publishing a notice and inviting the objections therein. While, the contention raised by the petitioner may seem attractive at the first glance, we noticed that so far as the inclusion of villages in the Municipal Council are concerned, the same are done following the provisions as provided under Section 101(3) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. 4. In case of “Sheela Kumari versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.” (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7718/2025), this Court has upheld the action of the State in delimitation and inclusion of villages in the municipalities. The action of the State was upheld, and challenge to the judgment was rejected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the judgment has attained finality. In view thereto, inclusion of villages in the Municipal Council, Kotputli can neither be said to be unjustified nor it can be objected to. 5. So far as the contention raised before us relating to Master Plan and inclusion of villages in the said Master Plan of 2011-2031 is concerned, we find that the new villages which have been included now in the Municipal Council, Kotputli, would not automatically become part of the Master Plan but for the said purpose, the concerned authorities would have to take steps in [2026:RJ-JP:13764-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-7585/2025] terms of Section 162 of the Act, 2009, whereafter, the governing Master Plan 2011-2031 will also extend to such new villages. 6. In view thereto, the challenge fails and the present petition is accordingly dismissed. 7. Pending applications stand disposed of. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ LALIT MOHAN/4