Back
2025 Supreme(Raj) 2304
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, BIPIN GUPTA, JJ.
State of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry – Appellant
Versus
Jaisan Kadri Gopal Go Seva Sansthan, Through The President Ramtulla Khan, S/o. Jumme Khan – Respondent
D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1075/2024 Connected With D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1117 of 2024, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1134 of 2024, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1151 of 2024, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1155 of 2024, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1200 of 2024, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1212 of 2024, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1213 of 2024, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1218 of 2024, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1224 of 2024, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 36 of 2025, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 168 of 2025.
Decided On : 01-12-2025
For the Appellant :Mr. S.S. Ladrecha, Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. Ravindra Jala and Mr. Deepak Suthar, Advocates Mr. Nathu Singh Rathore, Additional Advocate General, Mr. Shanu Prajapat, Advocates Mr. Arpit Samaria, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Ankur Mathur, Advocate, Mr. Harshvardhan Thanvi, Advocate, Mr. Manas Khatri, Advocate, Mr. Uttam Singh Rajpurohit, Advocate, Mr. Ramesh Suthar, Advocate, Mr. Devang Devra, Advocate, Mr. Ramesh Kumar, Advocate
The court affirmed that State authorities may withhold financial assistance pending verification of compliance with guidelines, emphasizing that subsequent inspections can contradict earlier approvals and are essential for public interest.
Headnote:(A) Financial Assistance Guidelines - 08.02.2021, 21.08.2023 - Bovine welfare and compliance - The court reaffirmed the administrative authority to verify compliance before dispersing funds to Gaushalas based on subsequent inspections revealing discrepancies. The impugned order was found unjustified as it undermined statutory inspection powers and public interest. (Paras 1-7)
(B) Natural Justice - The court ruled that withholding financial assistance pending verification does not infringe upon natural justice principles as it is a preventive administrative action. The impugned order which mandated immediate release without addressing the discrepancies was quashed. (Paras 6.4, 6.5, 6.6)
Facts of the case:
The case involves multiple appeals by the State challenging the decision of the learned Single Judge to quash an order that withdrew financial assistance for bovine maintenance from a Gaushala based on subsequent inspections revealing irregularities in the number of animals reported.
Findings of Court:
The court determined that the State's actions to withhold funds were justified due to significant inconsistencies revealed in a surprise inspection, and that the Single Judge erred in requiring adherence to an earlier inspection report without addressing new findings.
Issues: The main issues included the authority of the State to withhold financial assistance based on later inspections, the legitimacy of the initial approval process, and the principles of natural justice in administrative actions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that statutory guidelines empower the administration to conduct surprise inspections and verify claims before releasing funds, thus upholding the integrity of public financing.
Result: Special Appeals allowed; the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 25.04.2024 is quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. appellants' arguments against the learned single judge's order (Para 4) |
| 3. respondent's support for the learned single judge's order (Para 5) |
| 4. court's analysis and observations on compliance (Para 6) |
| 5. conclusion and order of the court (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT :
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.
1. The present batch of Special Appeals (Writ) has been preferred by the appellant–State and its authorities assailing multiple orders passed by the learned Single Judge in various writ petitions filed by different Gaushala/Goshala societies. For the sake of convenience, D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 168/2025 is treated as the lead case, as the impugned order dated 25.04.2024 passed therein, in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4199/2024 titled “Hariyala Rajasthan Gaushala Vikash Sansthan vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.”, formed the foundational basis on which the other writ petitions were subsequently allowed. The brief facts and the challenge in the appeals are therefore being noted from the said lead matter, and the remaining connected Special Appeals (D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ Nos. 1075/2024, 1117/2024, 1134/2024, 1151/2024, 1155/2024, 1200/2024, 1212/2024, 1213/2024, 1218/2024, 1224/2024, 36/2025) shall stand disposed of in accordance with the decision rendered herein.
1.1. The present Special Appeal No. 168/2025 has been preferred claiming the following relief:
“ It is therefore, prayed that the appeal may kindly be allowed and;
(i) The impugned order dated 25.04.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4199/2024 (Hariyala Rajasthan Gaushala Vikash Sansthan vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) may kindly be quashed and set aside consequential thereof the writ petition filed by the respondent/writ petitioner may kindly be dismissed with costs.
(ii) Any other appropriate direction or order which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted.
(iii) Cost of the present appeal may kindly be awarded in favour of the appellants.”
2. Before entering into the factual matrix of this case this Court notes that bovine protection and welfare constitute an integral component of the State’s public policy, particularly in the arid and ecologically vulnerable region of Western Rajasthan, where cattle rearing and allied activities form a significant part of the rural economy. Recognising the indispensable role played by Gaushalas in providing shelter, nutrition and medical care to stray, abandoned and infirm bovine animals, the State Government issued guidelines dated 08.02.2021 to extend financial assistance to duly registered Gaushalas, proportionate to the number of bovine animals maintained. The scheme is conceived as a welfare measure aimed at ensuring the sustenance of bovine livestock and strengthening institutional accountability. It is against this welfare- oriented statutory and administrative backdrop that the present controversy arises.
3. The brief facts, as emerging from the lead case, are that the respondent–writ petitioner is a registered society running a Gaushala at Village Jesurana, District Jaisalmer, and is maintaining bovine animals eligible for financial assistance under the State Government Guidelines dated 08.02.2021. Pursuant to these guidelines, a physical inspection of the Gaushala was conducted by the Inspectors of the Animal Husbandry Department on 25.09.2023, wherein 498 bovine animals were found and the inspection report was duly forwarded to the competent authority. On the strength of this verified inspection report, an administrative and financial sanction dated 16.01.2024 was issued by the Department granting financial assistance to the respondent–Gaushala. However, before the sanctioned amount could be released, the Director, Gopalan-Directorate, issued an order dated 14.02.2024 withdrawing the sanctioned grant on the basis of a subsequent surprise inspection said to have been conducted on 07.02.2024, wherein a l
