Judgment V. K. Bali, J.-On Circular Road Jaipur within a short distance of a big roundal, on the left hand side, if one is to proceed towards Central Park and still ahead, High Court, Rajasthan (Jaipur Bench), Jaipur is located at a small distance. Whereas, on the right side of the road starting from the roundal there is Golf and Polo Club, on the left side of the road as mentioned above, after some distance there is High Court, on the same side of the road, there is Secretariat. It is an excellent broad road but because of location of important institutions and clubs, it is busiest from 09.00 to 10.30 a.m and 03.30 to 05.00 p.m. 2. Mr. Jugal Kishore Agarwal a practicing lawyer in the Rajasthan High Court, (Jaipur Bench), Jaipur made a written complaint dated 13th May, 2005 and presented the same before the Division Bench of this Court presided over by Honble Mr. Justice S.K. Keshote. In the complaint/letter aforesaid, Mr. Agarwal mentioned that the vehicles coming from opposite direction come on a very fast speed because of which those who have to enter in the Court premises like lawyers and persons of media are put to a great inconvenience as despite their giving proper signals for turning towards the left to enter in to High Court, the vehicles coming from opposite side do not give side. Because of high speed of the vehicles coming from the opposite direction, there have been number of accidents of lawyers and persons of media who have received injuries. Their vehicles have also been damaged. He made a complaint of having sustained such injuries himself and further stated that as per his information, one lawyer had even died. He prayed that this Court should direct that on each gate of the High Court a police official should be deputed so that he may be able to control the traffic and by which, the lawyers and the persons from media may not feel inconvenience and may remain safe. 3. On receipt of the aforesaid letter, Honble Division Bench of this Court then seized of the matter observed that it cannot be denied that the road located opposite to the High Court had lot of traffic and the vehicles come on a high speed. It was also observed that naturally the vehicle run fast as the road is very good. On receipt of the aforesaid letter, Honble Division Bench of this Court then seized of the matter observed that it cannot be denied that the road located opposite to the High Court had lot of traffic and the vehicles come on a high speed. It was also observed that naturally the vehicle run fast as the road is very good. All gates which serve ingress to the High Court open on this road. The Court also observed that there should be a proper arrangement to control the traffic on the gates opening in the High Court, lack of which was resulting into accidents, the number of which could well increase in future. By observing as mentioned above, the Division Bench of this Court ordered that the letter of Mr. Agarwal be treated as a writ petition and be put up for admission on 20th May, 2005. In compliance of the order passed by the Division Bench as mentioned above, the Registry treated it as a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The same Honble Division Bench, vide order dated 26th May, 2005 impleaded the Bar Council of Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur as party through Secretary and a notice was issued to the added party as well. On 6th June 2005 Court recorded its satisfaction on the efforts made by the Addl. Supdt. of Police, Jaipur City, Jaipur in controlling the traffic. A reply too has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it has inter alia been pleaded that the State has already informed the Court about the steps undertaken by it. A photostat copy of the order dated 20th May, 2005 has been annexed as (Annexure-R1). It is also pleaded that the problem pointed out by the petitioner does not only concern with the arrangement by the traffic police but also reflects on the internal parking arrangements within the Court premises. If adequate in house parking arrangements are made within the Court premises to effectively monitor the vehicle movement, chances of accidents taking place would be effectively minimized. The Traffic Police monitored the movement on 27th May, 2005, 30th May, 2005 and number of Cars, Scooters and Motor Cycles were counted. The photostat copy of the statement showing number of vehicles visiting the Court premises during different time period has been placed on record as Annexure-R 2. The Traffic Police monitored the movement on 27th May, 2005, 30th May, 2005 and number of Cars, Scooters and Motor Cycles were counted. The photostat copy of the statement showing number of vehicles visiting the Court premises during different time period has been placed on record as Annexure-R 2. It is then pleaded that on an average about 1,600 vehicles visit the High Court premises every day out of which cars are numbered as 470 during a particular period. Two wheelers are roughly 1,100 in number. Every vehicle which enters in to High Court premises is parked for some time. Therefore, parking facility of at-least 2000 vehicles is needed in the High Court premises. Since, the arrangement of parking facility within the High Court premises is an internal matter of the Registry of this Court, therefore, the respondent cannot comment on that. However, there are certain suggestions, which may be relevant for the kind consideration of the Honble Court. The suggestions incorporated in the written statement are as follows:- “(i) Registry may be directed to get a parking plan prepared for the High Court premises. (ii) Till necessary suitable arrangements in the proper manner are made the Registry may kindly be directed to specify separate points for entry and exit and this arrangement be directed to be strictly followed. (iii) Complete restriction on the entry of cars in Gate Nos. 2 and 3 be enforced and only two wheelers may be allowed. (iv) Tillfurther arrangements are made entry of cars be restricted only for Gate No. 4 and exit should take place through Gate No. 5 i.e., the gate of building earlier housing buildings of Social Welfare Department.” It is then pleaded that in any case, the respondent traffic department has ensured proper regulation of vehicle movement. In order dated 20th May, 2005 (Annexure-R/1), the Constables who have been deputed on turning points of Gandhi Nagar, Ram Bagh Circle, Polo Circle, I, II and III Gates of the High Court, Secretariat and Jan Path for controlling of traffic has been mentioned. 4. Mr. Bharat Vyas learned Addl. Advocate General on the basis of reply filed on behalf of the respondent State and on instructions states that all out efforts have been made to control and regulate the traffic plying on the concerned road on which four entry gates of the High Court are located. 5. The Complaint made by Mr. 4. Mr. Bharat Vyas learned Addl. Advocate General on the basis of reply filed on behalf of the respondent State and on instructions states that all out efforts have been made to control and regulate the traffic plying on the concerned road on which four entry gates of the High Court are located. 5. The Complaint made by Mr. Agarwal in letter dated 13th May, 2005 appears to have been properly addressed. At all possible entry points of the High Court, traffic constables have been posted to regulate the traffic on the road. It may be mentioned that the complaint pertains to regulate the traffic on the road and particularly for the gates leading to entry in the High Court. The respondents have done well to redress the grievance of Mr. Agarwal. The chances of accidents have been minimized. None has chosen to appear on behalf of Mr. Agarwal or for the Bar Association of the High Court which has been impleaded as party, which further shows that all that could be possibly done to regulate the traffic on the road leading to the entry points in the High Court has been done. In so far as parking in the High Court premises is concerned, the respondents have given some suggestions. The Registrar General of this Court would take the suggestions given by the respondents into consideration and make a plan for parking the vehicles in the premises of the High Court. The Registrar General will also take views of the High Court Bar Association, Jaipur. He may further have assistance of traffic experts in the Police Department. After taking into consideration the suggestions, view points of the Bar Association and traffic experts, a proper plan for parking of the vehicles in the Court premises shall be made and the same shall be placed before the Honble Chief Justice, who may be pleased to accept the same as made by the Registrar General or may suggest modifications as may meet the requirements of parking in the Court premises. It may be mentioned that parking within the premises of the High Court is in sole discretion of the High Court and Honble Chief Justice may give his own suggestions in addition to the suggestions given by the Registrar General after doing the exercise as mentioned above. It may be mentioned that parking within the premises of the High Court is in sole discretion of the High Court and Honble Chief Justice may give his own suggestions in addition to the suggestions given by the Registrar General after doing the exercise as mentioned above. Surely, parking within the High Court premises may even be regulated by the State authorities but the same shall be on the directions that may be issued by Honble Chief Justice. 6. With the observations made above, this petition is disposed of .