Suraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11715 of 2023 ====================================================== Suraj Kumar S/o Madan Prasad Gupta, R/o village-Sarwan Bazar, P.s. Barachatti, District-Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Addl. Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Director Panchayati Raj Departemnt, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.
The Collector, Gaya.
4.
The Deputy Development Commissioner, Government of Bihar, Gaya. 5.
The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Gaya.
6.
The Block Development Officer, Barachatti, Gaya. 7.
The Block Programme Officer, Barachatti, Gaya. 8.
The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Sarwan, Block-Barachatti, Dist-Gaya. 9.
The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Sarwan, Block-Barachatti, Dist-Gaya.
10.
The Panchayat Roigar Sevak, Gram Panchayat Raj Sarwan, BlockBarachatti, Dist-Gaya. 11.
Junior Engineer, Block-Barachatti, Dist-Gaya. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Suraj Narain Yadav, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Md. N.H. Khan (SC-1) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 25-08-2023 The writ petition is filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation seeking inquiry into the defalcation of public money by the respondent Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj Sarwan Block Barachatti, District Gaya, in connivance with respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 9-11; who are the various Officers
Patna High Court CWJC No.11715 of 2023 dt.25-08-2023 2/2 under the Government. The allegation is also with respect to the renovation/cleaning of the drainage from the canal to the field of Kameshwar Prasad, allegedly done in the year 2021 and again carried out in the year 2021-22 by changing the name of the scheme. It has to be immediately noticed that the said named person has not been impleaded and none of the Officers, who are alleged to have involved themselves in the defalcation or misappropriation have been impleaded in their personal capacity. The petitioner on the basis of representations successively filed before the Officers seeks for disposal of the representation. This Court does not find any reason to invoke the extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India especially in the above writ petition, wherein scanty material is pleaded and even that is not proved.
2. We find absolutely no reason to entertain the public interest litigation and dismiss the same in limine. (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) ( Partha Sarthy, J) sharun/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 31.08.2023 Transmission Date