Ajeet Kumar Upadhyay v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13933 of 2013 ======================================================

1. Ajeet Kumar Upadhyay Son Of Late Birendra Upadhyay Resident Of Village- Haribanspur, Post Office- Warispur, Via- Bhagwanpur, Police Station- Bhagwanpur, District- Vaishali- 844114, Presently Posted As P.R.S. Jahangirpur Parera Block Bhagwanpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna

2. The District Magistrate, District- Vaishali

3. The Deputy Development Commissioner, District- Vaishali

4. The Lokpal Manrega, District- Vaishali

5. The Assistant Engineer, Manrega, District- Vaishali Block Bhagwanpur

6. The Programme Officer (Manrega) Block- Bhagwanpur DistrictVaishali .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Purushotam Sharma, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Girija Shankar Pd, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 12-04-2016 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner served as Rojgar Sevak under the Gram Panchayat on contractual basis for certain years. It is stated that presently he is not functioning as Rojgar Sevak. The plantation Scheme was taken up in the year 2009. Several complaints were received and the matter on a complaint went before the Lok Pal of Manrega who found the petitioner, Mukhiya and the technical assistant responsible for causing loss to the Government to the tune of Rs. 2,25,000/-.

Patna High Court CWJC No.13933 of 2013 (3) dt.12-04-2016 2/2 Proportionately, they were ordered to replenish the loss. The said order dated 17.05.2013 (Annexure-7) has been impugned in the writ petition.

Counsel for the petitioner is unable to disclose the legal status of Lok Pal . How the order of the Lok Pal, if any, can be implemented. Instead, he made submissions on the fastening of the monetary liability under the impugned order by the Lok Pal of Manrega. On the basis of the pleadings on record and after hearing counsel for the parties, this Court is unable to find any order prejudicial to the petitioner has till date been passed. As noticed above, the order of the Lok Pal of Manrega does not appear to have any statutory or legal status. It may be a kind of forum to resolve the complaints/disputes.

The Court, in such circumstance, would not grant relief to the petitioner giving him, however, liberty to approach the appropriate authority/ forum for redressal of his grievance against the aforesaid order dated 17.5.2013 (Annexure-7) in accordance with law.

The writ application stands disposed of.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Shyam/- U