Judgment Ravi S.Dhavan, J. 1. This petition, it appears, may have served its purpose already by receiving publicity even before presentation before the Court. As the petition was in the process of being filed, its contents were flashed in the newspapers, in a free Democracy, perhaps the intention to file a case may be news, the Court will leave this aspect at that. But that a case was not taken up as a measure of urgency and a mention was declined, as reported in some sections of the Press, was not exactly correct reporting. The case was filed and it was found defective. The case file was taken out of Court to remove the defects. It was filed at the High Court after removal of defects yesterday, 23 April, at 4:50 p.m. after Court hours. Newspapers may report, but reporting also depends upon faith that what is put in print is correct. Reports in yesterday mornings newspapers on this matter were not. 2. This petition draws the attention of the High Court to a political rally that is about to take place on 30 April. Given an occasion the petitioners would like the High Court to stop the rally, failing which they desire the High Court to give orders to almost all state agencies, Government of India and the Railways included, to ensure that the public is not inconvenienced. 3. All political rallies do create such situations in generality, where there is invariably inconvenience to the public to some degree. A reading of this petition reveals, in effect, that it desires that the High Court solve all the ills of Bihar by one stroke of the pen, granting a long list of demands, and directing almost all agencies to do what is, in essence, their duty toward the public. They should not need a Court order to do this. The High Court does not have a simple pill for removing any ills instantly. The brewing of the ills may have fermented beyond one generation, if not more. The High Court is not the Messiah. As a ready solution, as if it was the man for all seasons, it is not. The High Court does not have a simple pill for removing any ills instantly. The brewing of the ills may have fermented beyond one generation, if not more. The High Court is not the Messiah. As a ready solution, as if it was the man for all seasons, it is not. If indeed the petitioners were serious in joining a common effort as a common cause, then there are many matters pending in the High Court which may need their assistance for resolution whether petitioners or state officials to solve problems in the "spirit of inquiry and reform" as part of a "collective activity" so that the State of Bihar within "the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement" (Quotations from Art. 51-A of the Constitution of India). 4. Of actions and reactions between rallies and counter-rallies, it all depends which one suits whom. The High Court is not the arbitrator in politics. In the past when there was an overt act by the State Government to requisition schools for a rally, the High Court gave its decision against a particular, specific order, that it cannot be done and special law restrains it. (2001 (4) PUR 592 : AIR 2002, Patna, 9. The Association of Independent Schools, Bihar and Ors., V/s. The State of Bihar and others. In this hastily-drafted petition a far more sweeping order is desired. The maintenance of law and order is the inherent duty of the Government. But, protests, demonstration, and competing equalities in politics have not been restrained by law, as long as they are within limits of public law and order. In a land of rallies, between yesterdays rally, todays rally and tomorrows rally the restraining hand must be in the morality and ethics of politics and the solution is not with the High Court. Dismissed.