Jan Jagran Shakti Sangathan v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15415 of 2014 ====================================================== Jan Jagran Shakti Sangathan through its General Secretary Kamayani Swami, W/o Ashish , A/5 Sidhartha Apartment, Jagdeo Path, P.S. Airport, Patna-800014.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Secretary to the Government of Bihar, Rural Development Department, Patna.

3. The District Officer -cum- District Programme Coordinator, Araria.

4. The District Officer -cum- District Programme Coordinator, Katihar.

5. The District Officer -cum- District Programme Coordinator, Saharsa.

6. The Programme Officer, at and P.S. Mansahi, District Katihar.

7. The Programme Officer, at and P.S. Araria, District Araria.

8. The Programme Officer, at and P.S. Kursakata, District Araria.

9. The Programme Officer, at and P.S. Forbesganj, District Araria.

10. The Programme Officer, at and P.S. Sonbarsa Raj, District Saharsa. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Niti Ranjan Jha Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prashant Pratap, GP-6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 13-02-2015 Heard the parties.

The petitioner claims to be a registered trade union of Mahatma Gandhi, National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'MANREGA') workers and complains that its members have not been paid unemployment allowance under 'the MANREGA' for the period 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14.

Mr. Niti Ranjan Jha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that despite there being

Patna High Court CWJC No.15415 of 2014 (2) dt.13-02-2015 communication from the Rural Development Department to the District Magistrate(s) of Saharsa, Araria and Katihar to consider the same but no steps have been taken for payment. Mr. Jha though relies upon paragraph 10 of the writ petition to submit that representations have been filed but no copy of the same is present on record.

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the liberty to the persons aggrieved by non-payment of unemployment allowance under 'the MANREGA' to represent before the District Magistrate -cum- District Programme Coordinator of the district concerned with the facts and figures and any such application is being filed before the District Magistrate concerned would be considered and disposed of in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- U