Nirmala Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16577 of 2016 ====================================================== Nirmala Devi D/o Sri Pitambar Mahto, resident of Village- Pahadpur, Police Station- Bibhutipur, District- Samastipur, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.

Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Special Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department- cum-Member Secretary, Bihar Rajya Jal Avam Swakchchhta Samiti, Government of Bihar Patna 3.

The Selection Committee for Block Co-ordinator through its Chairman Engineer-in-Chief, Public Health Engineering Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4.

The District Magistrate, Samastipur.

5.

The Executive Engineer, District Water Cleanliness Committee, Samastipur. 6.

Kanchan Kumari, D/o Sri Ram Lakhan Thakur, Bahadurpur, Ward No. 26, Police Station and District- Samastipur.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bijay Bhushan Prasad For the Respondent/s :

Mr. S.Raza Ahmad-AAG 5 Mr. Vishwambhar Prasad, AC to AAG 5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 08-05-2019 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent State.

Petitioner alleges irregularities in selection of Block Coordinator. The short submission is that his grievances, which are pending before the District Magistrate -cum- Chairman of the District Water and Cleanness Committee Samastipur, have not been disposed of.

Specific assertion has been made by the respondents

Patna High Court CWJC No.16577 of 2016(2) dt.08-05-2019 2/2 in their counter affidavit regarding manipulation in Annexure 6 by the petitioner before filing it in the instant proceeding. The stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit till date stands uncontroverted. By resorting to misrepresentation, petitioner cannot be permitted to invoke the equitable jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

In view of the aforesaid situation, this Court is not inclined to exercise jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. The writ petition is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SNkumar/- U