Ajay Bhushan Diwakar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11926 of 2015 ====================================================== Ajay Bhushan Diwakar Son of Late Ram Ratan Thakur, resident of village - Shankarpur, P.s. - Mahua, District - Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar, represented through Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

District Maistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur.

4.

District Development Commissioner, Vaishali at Hajipur. 5.

District Programme Officer, Manua, District - Vaishali at Hajipur. 6.

Subdivisional Officer, Mahua District - Vaishali at Hajipur. 7.

Development Commissioner, the Chairman of the Stae Level Montoring Committee, Manrega Scheme.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Nilesh Kumar For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to GP-7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 14-12-2022 The instant writ petition has been filed for the following relief:- "That this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction in terms of certiorari for quashing the order contained in memo no. 235863 dated 26.6.2015 issued under the signature of secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna by which a direction has been issued to the Deputy Development Commissioner, Vaishali to institute first information report as well as a certificate case against the petitioner and other accused persons

Patna High Court CWJC No.11926 of 2015(3) dt.14-12-2022 2/2 for their alleged involvement in defalcation of Rs. 9,67,042/- against the various government schemes and further prays for staying the operation of the impugned order during pendency of the present application."

Learned counsel for the State submits that the F.I.R. and certificate case have already been lodged. Be that as it may be, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition in view of the nature of the relief claimed in the writ petition. The petitioner would be at liberty to avail his remedies in the certificate proceedings under the Public Demands Recovery, Act or in respect of the F.I.R, if lodged in accordance with law. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) Raj kishore/- U