is only prohibition against location which is relatable only as to an educational institution, temple, church, mosque or burial ground and that the said prohibition is inapplicable in the case of a burning ground. Their Lordships of the Division Bench in Madhu's case (supra) held that the above said Rule 6(2) uses the words "burial ground" in a broad manner and is used with common parlance and including not merely burial grounds used by Christians and Muslims, but also place where Hindus cremate the dead bodies of the members of their communities. That though it is true that the Christian buries the dead bodies adjacent to the Churches, Muslims adjacent to the mosques, and in a strict sense "burial ground" will be a ground where dead bodies are buried. But it is true that so far as Hindus are concerned, generally, the dead are consigned to the flames and may be customs in certain local areas require the dead bodies are to be intered, etc. But that in the context of Rule 6(2), the words "burial grounds", in view of the Division Bench, have been used by the rule making authority in a larger sense so as to cover not only cases of burial of dead bodies of Christians and Muslims, but also of the Hindus, though in the case of Hindus, a majority, especially elders are cremated and only children are buried. Thus, it
