Honble PATIL, CJ.–The News Paper clipping of Dainik Bhaskar dated 8.12.98 sent to this Court was ordered to be treated as a writ petition treating it to be a public interest litigation. The said news Paper clipping with photograph shows that three police personnels are riding on a motor vehicle in violation of the Traffic Rules and the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. (2). On 15.12.98, the Division Bench of this Court directed issuance of notice to the Superintendent of Police, Udaipur asking him to submit his detailed report to this Court taking note of the fact that there was violation of Traffic Rules by the police personnels who are police personnels themselves. After service of notice, the Superintendent of Police, udaipur has now filed reply. In the reply it is submitted that the three traffic police personnels were riding on a motor vehicle as found in the photograph seen in the News Paper clipping. According to the respondent, on enquiry, he found that driver of the vehicle was Kanhaiya Lal, a constable working in Traffic Wing. He was challaned on 13.12.98. vide Challan No. 492831 dated 13.12.98. A fine of Rs. 150/- was imposed on him in the case registered under Sec. 128/177 of the Motor Vehicles Act which amount was also deposited by him. (3). It is further submitted that after seeing the photograph of the three traffic police personnels riding on the motor vehicle in the news Paper dated 8.12.98, the office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police issued a letter to all the officers and the traffic police personnels on 8.12.98 itself to strictly comply the Traffic Rules and not to flout them. Further taking a serious note of said Kanhaiya Lal, being a member of police force who flouted the Traffic Rules by allowing two more constables to ride on his motor vehicle, was charge-sheeted under Rule 17 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 and it has been decided to take disciplinary action against him. It is further stated in para No. 12 of the reply that even before the notice issued from this Court were received, action was taken against Kanhaiya Lal on 13.12.98. It is further stated in para No. 12 of the reply that even before the notice issued from this Court were received, action was taken against Kanhaiya Lal on 13.12.98. The Superintendent of Police, Udaipur, in his reply, has further assured this Court that no person connected with the Traffic Rules has been saved or is being saved and in future also, Strict compliance with such Traffic Rules shall be made by the traffic police personnels. The said Superintendent of Police, under the circumstances, has prayed for disposal of the petition in the light of the submissions made in the reply. (4). The learned counsel representing the respondent submitted that the Superintendent of Police has taken a serious view for the conduct of said Kanhaiya Lal and other two police constables in violating the Traffic Rules and action is also taken against said Kanhaiya Lal, both on prosecution side as well as by initiating disciplinary proceedings. (5). We do not find that any action was taken against-two other constables who were riding on the motor vehicle. it is strange that the traffic police constables who were engaged to see that the Traffic Rules are obeyed have themselves disob- eyed the Traffic Rules, their conduct is highly condemnable. We fail to understand how they can regulate the traffic and enforce the Traffic Rules on the public when they themselves are guilty of violating the Traffic Rules. We do not wish to say anything more specially when the Superintendent of Police, as is evident, from the reply filed, has taken action and assured that in future such things shall not happen and necessary instructions have already been issued in this regard. (6). Placing the reply of the Superintendent of Police, therefore, on the record and, having regard to the submissions made in the reply, we do not think it necessary to proceed further but we make it clear that some appropriate action has to be taken against two other police constables who were also riding on the motor vehicle itself. (7). This petition stands disposed of in the light of what has been stated above.