Anil Kumar Thakur v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9730 of 2020 ====================================================== 1.
Anil Kumar Thakur Son of Dinesh Thakur Resident of Bishunpur Ghat, District- Darbhanga, at present Member of Anti Corruption Foundation of India having its registered office at Kalptaru Bhawan, Alalpatti, Darbhanga (Bihar).
2.
Kamlesh Kumar Thakur Son of Mahesh Thakur Resident of Usari, DistrictDarbhanga, at present Member of Anti Corruption Foundation of India having its registered office at Kalptaru Bhawan, Alalpatti, Darbhanga (Bihar).
3.
Dharmendra Kumar Son of Jagdev Paswan Resident of Siswabarhi, Phulsarai, District- Madhubani, at present Member of Anti Corruption Foundation of India having its registered office at Kalptaru Bhawan, Alalpatti, Darbhanga (Bihar).
4.
Anil Kumar Son of Gulab Sah Resident of Pandaul Buzurg, Sitamarhi, Raipur, District- Sitamarhi, at present Member of Anti Corruption Foundation of India having its registered office at Kalptaru Bhawan, Alalpatti, Darbhanga (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.
The Principal Secretary, Department of Rural Development, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Vigilance, Government of Bihar, Patna.
4.
The Director, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar. 5.
The District Magistrate, Samastipur.
6.
The District Programme Officer, Samastipur.
7.
The District Welfare Officer, Samastipur.
8.
The Sub Divisional Officer, Samastipur.
9.
The Child Development Project Officer, Samastipur. 10.
The Block Development Officer cum Executive Officer, Kalyanpur Block, Samastipur.
11.
The Block Programme Officer, Kalyanpur Block, Samastipur. 12.
The Circle Officer, Kalyanpur Block, Samastipur. 13.
The Welfare Officer, Kalyanpur Block, Samastipur.
2/5 14.
The Block Supply Officer, Kalyanpur Block, Samastipur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Zainul Abedin For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Lalit Kishore (Ag) ====================================================== (The proceedings of the Court are being conducted through Video Conferencing and the Advocates joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residence.) CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR) Date : 23-12-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioners have prayed for the following relief(s):- "(I) For issuance of a writ of mandamus for direction to the respondents authorities to constitute a high level inquiry committee to inquire the gross illegalities and irregularities/embezzlement of Government money and non cooperation of authorities in implementing Panchayati Raj Act during financial year 2018-19 and 2019-20.
Favouratism and corruption are practiced by the block authorities of Kalyanpur Block, Samastipur in different development schemes like plantation of trees, setting of hand pumps, irregularities in supply chain regarding Public Distribution System, irregularities in MANREGA scheme, irregularities in construction of latrine under Lohia Swachchh Bharat Mission scheme, irregularities in Midday meal, huge corruption in Chief Minister Seven Nishchay scheme, Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna and Jal-Jeevan-Hariyali Abhiyan, irregularities in agriculture, education, health,
3/5 welfare, electricity and circle office, non taking action against corrupt officials etc which are being done in connivance with the block authorities causing not only depriving the people of the block from the benefit of such schemes by huge misappropriation/ embezzlement of Government money.
(II) for issuance of a writ of mandamus for commanding the respondents to take appropriate action against the erring authorities who despite several representations/ public petitions could not take any action to restrain respondents from illegalities and irregularities being done in several representations/ public petitions could not take any action to restrain respondents from illegalities and irregularities being done in several development schemes within Kalyanpur Block, Samastipur."
After the matter was heard for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner shall be content if a direction is issued to the concerned respondents to consider and decide the representation which the petitioner shall be filing for redressal of the grievance(s).
State has no objection to the same.
As such, petition is disposed of in the following terms: The petitioner shall file a representation before the authority concerned within a period of eight weeks. The concerned respondent is directed to consider and decide such representation expeditiously and preferably within a
4/5 period of two months from the date of its filing along with a copy of this order.
The proceedings, during the time of current PandemicCovid-19 shall be conducted through digital mode, unless the parties otherwise mutually agree to meet in person i.e. physical mode.
Equally, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to such alternative remedies as are otherwise available in accordance with law.
We are hopeful that as and when petitioner takes recourse to such remedies, as are otherwise available in law, before the appropriate forum, the same shall be dealt with, in accordance with law and with reasonable dispatch. Needless to add, while considering such representation, principles of natural justice shall be followed and due opportunity of hearing be afforded to the parties. Liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the Court, if the need so arises subsequently on the same and subsequent cause of action.
We have not expressed any opinion on merits.
The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, also stands
5/5 disposed of.
(Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( S. Kumar, J) veena/rrajivAFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date NA Transmission Date NA