Shobha Kumari And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9303 of 2017 ====================================================== 1.

Shobha Kumari and Anr wife of Birendra Kumar resident of village - Lakhibag, Manpur, P.S. - Muffasil, Dist - Gaya. 2.

Ramashray Singh son of Sri Satya Narayan Singh resident of village - Chadhta, P.S. - Tekan, Dist - Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Director Mid day Meal Scheme, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.

District Education Officer, Gaya.

4.

District Programme Officer Mid-day Meal Gaya. 5.

District Programme Officer, Establishment, Gaya. 6.

Block Education Officer, Belaganj, Dist - Gaya. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy No-1 Sc13] For MDM :

Mr. Girijesh Kumar, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-06-2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel appearing for the Mid Day Meal Scheme submit that the petitioner No. 1 is Sr. Teacher posted at Primary School, Sherpur, Belaganj, Gaya and petitioner No. 2 is Headmaster posted at Middle School Silonja, Belaganj, Gaya and they have challenged letter No. 2636 dated 07.06.2017 issued by Respondent No.5,/The District Programme Officer, Establishment, Gaya and letter No. 2639 dated 07.06.2017 issued by Respondent No.5,/The District Programme Officer, Establishment, Gaya directing the petitioners to deposit/refund the excess amount received by them for providing mid-day meal.

Patna High Court CWJC No.9303 of 2017(6) dt.25-06-2024 2/2

3. Learned counsel for the Mid Day Meal submits that upon inspection made by the respondent authority, it was found that the number of children were found less than the attendance made by the petitioner.

4. Taking into consideration the nature of dispute, in my opinion, it is appropriate for the Director, Mid Day Meal, to hear both the parties and pass a final order upon the order of recovery issued by the District Programme Officer, Gaya

5. Accordingly, I direct the Director, Mid Day Meal, to fix a date for appearance of the petitioners and the respondent no. 7 before him, for giving them personal hearing and deciding the matter by a reasoned order. Director, Mid Day Meal can hear the matter through virtual mode or hybrid mode subject to approval of the parties concerned.

6. The entire exercise must be completed by the Director within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ application is disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) perwez U