JUDGMENT : Heard on admission. 2.The petitioner, who is a Public Relation Officer and Spokesperson of CatholicBishop's Council Madhya Pradesh, has filed the present Public InterestLitigation essentially against the decision of the State Government directingall the Government schools to include the book Gita Sar "Essence of Bhagwat Gita " from coming academic session on the ground thatit is violative of Article 28 (1) of the Constitutionof India. The petitioner has also prayed that instead of one religious book,the respondents be directed to teach summary of all religions in schools. 3.It is to be noted that but for the newspaper clippings, the petitioner has notfiled any order of the State Government directing to include the book Gita Sar "Essence of Bhagwat Gita " in all theGovernment schools from coming academic session. It is also to be noted that byorder dated 29-7-2011 the Counsel for petitioner was granted two months time tofirst read Gita before arguing this Public InterestLitigation so that he may clearly understand whether Gita is a Philosophy of life or is associated with any religion. The learned Counselfor petitioner fairly stated that although he has read Gita ,he could not fully understand it. 4.In Aruna Roy Vs . Union ofIndia, AIR 2002 SC 3176 , the Supreme Court has held that expression"religious instruction" used in Article 28 (1) has a restrictedmeaning and conveys that teachings of customs, ways of worship, practices andrituals cannot be allowed in educational institutions wholly maintained out ofState funds. 5.On reading of clause (1) of Article 28 we find that it does not ban moralinstruction, disassociated from any denominational doctrines, which is anessential part of training in citizenship, maintenance of law and order in theState, and growth of social cohesion. Gita isessentially a book on Indian Philosophy and not a book on Indian Religion. 6.For these reasons, we find the petition wholly misconceived and dismiss itsummarily.