Rajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10585 of 2017 =========================================================== Rajesh Kumar, S/o Nirajun Ray, Resident of Village-Kushwan, P.O.-Bir, P.S.- Dhanarua, District-Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through its Secretary, Department of Rural Works Development Department, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, Department, of Rural Work Department Development, Bihar, Patna

3. The Chief Engineer-I, Department of Rural Work Development, Patna.

4. Department of Vigilance, Rural Works Department, Bihar, Patna.

5. The Superintedent, Engineer, Works Unchai, Patna, Department of Rural Work Development, Patna

6. The District Officer, Patna.

7. The Executive Engineer, Masaurhi Division, Patna Department of Rural Work Development Work Division, Masaurhi.

8. Sri Naresh Kumar Chaudhary, the Assistant Engineer, Masarhi Division, Patna, Department of Rural Work Development Work Division, Masaurhi.

9. The Junior Engineer, Masaurhi, Division, Patna, Department of Rural Work Development, Work Division, Masaurhi.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Pushkar Narain Shahi- AAG 6 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 02-08-2017 In this writ petition filed in public interest, petitioner wants an enquiry to be conducted with regard to construction of a RCC Road from Daulta to Mrijachak via Kushwan in the execution of an agreement entered into with the respondents and the Public Works Department.

Keeping in view the nature of grievance made by the

Patna High Court CWJC No.10585 of 2017 dt.02-08-2017 2/2 petitioner and the fact that the petitioner only claims to be a citizen of India public spirited, we are not inclined to interfere into the matter and examine a question with regard to execution of a contract. Petitioner has not given any detail with regard to his public spirited antecedents and at the instance of the petitioner; we are not inclined to go into the matter. Petitioner may take up the issue with the Vigilance authorities of the State and it would be for the Vigilance or the Statutory authority, like the Lokayukta, if any case is made, to cause an enquiry into the matter. However, on the basis of the material adduced by the petitioner and the averments made by the petitioner in the writ petition, we are not inclined to go into the issue in this public interest writ petition. Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. (Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Sunil/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 05.08.2017 Transmission Date