Jeevesh Kumar v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14925 of 2016 =========================================================== Jeevesh Kumar, Son of Shri Ram Sudhar Jha, resident of village - Balani, P.S. Bahera, District Darbhanga, Presently Secretary, Samaj Vikas Jan Kalyan Samity office at Village Balani, P.S. Bahera, District Darbhanga. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Rural Development, Department of Rural Development, Government of India, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi

2. The State of Bihar through its Commissioner.

3. The District Magistrate/Collector, Darbhanga.

4. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Darbhanga.

5. The Block Development officer, Block Benipur, Darbhanga.

6. The Circle officer, Block Benipur, Darbhanga.

7. The Panchayat Sachiv, Block Benipur, District Darbhanga. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Binay Kumar Pandey, A. C. to G.A. 2. For the U.O.I. : Mr. S.D.Sanjay, A.S.G. and Mr. R.K.Sharma, C.G.Z. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 22-03-2017 Inter alia contending that in disbursement of funds under 'Indira Awas Yojna', rampant illegalities are being committed and by pointing of that the certain persons, who had already received benefit under 'Indira Awas Yojna', again are being given the same in a random manner and thereby public money is being misutilised and embezzled, the petition is filed for conducting an enquiry into the matter.

Patna High Court CWJC No.14925 of 2016 dt.22-03-2017 2/2 Except for submitting a list of persons who are said to have been benefited, there is no other evidence or cogent material to show that the complaint made by the petitioner is genuine or correct. The allegations are not made out from the documents that have been filed in the writ petition. The petitioner has a remedy of filing statutory complaint before the Lokayukt Organization under the statutory provision and it is for the Lokayukt Organization to conduct an enquiry into the illegalities and take action in accordance with law, that being so, it is appropriate for the petitioner to take recourse to the remedy of making a statutory complaint to the Lokayukt Organization or the Chief Vigilance Organization of the State Government. With the aforesaid liberty, this application stands disposed of. (Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 28.03.2017.

Transmission Date U.K./-