Indrani Roy @ Indrani Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.793 of 2018 ====================================================== Indrani Roy @ Indrani Devi W/o Sri Lal Babu Rai Former Chairman of Zila Parishad, Sitamarhi and Presently , Member of Zila Parishad, Sitamarhi Resident of Village-Rupauli, P.S. Runni Saidpur, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 2.

D.D.C. -cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sitamarhi. 3.

District Engineer, Zila Parishad, Sitamarhi.

4.

Executive Engineer, Building Division, Sitamarhi. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K., Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Akash Raj, AC to GA-5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

No one appears on behalf of the Zila Parishad. By order dated 23.03.2023, the petitioner was directed to bring on record the payments which she had made towards maintenance of the house which was allotted to her by virtue of her post.

The order dated 23.03.2023 clearly recorded that if the petitioner had spent any amount on furnishing the house in question then definitely the payments would have been made to the contractor by cheques or to the shopkeepers from whom she might have purchased any articles.

Patna High Court CWJC No.793 of 2018(3) dt.26-04-2023 2/2 The order dated 23.03.2023 also recorded that in order for petitioner to succeed, first she will have to establish that she had spent the amounts towards maintenance of the house in which she was staying by valid means.

Today when the matter is taken up, no affidavit on behalf of the petitioner has been filed, but the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had spent the entire amount which she is seeking in the present writ application by cash.

The Court is not impressed.

The writ application is dismissed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U