← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/11564/2023disposed

Ram Dev Singh @ Ramdeo Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2023-12-04Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11564 of 2023 ====================================================== Ram Dev Singh @ Ramdeo Singh Son of Lakhan Singh Resident of VillageDharampur, P.S.-Cheriya Bariyarpur, District-Begusarai, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Rural Development, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secrrretary, Department of Environment and Forest, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Magistrate -Cum-Collector, Begusarai. 4.

The Superintendent of Police, Begusarai.

5.

The Divisional Forest Officer, Begusarai.

6.

The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Bihar, Patna. 7.

District Programme Manager, JEEVIKA, Begusarai. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vikram Kumar Pankaj For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Sarvesh Kumar Singh ( Aag 13 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-12-2023 Heard the parties.

2. The prayer of the petitioner is that for initiating an enquiry into the alleged gross illegality committed by respondent No. 5 that is Divisional Forest Officer, Begusarai in allotment of plant nurseries to ineligible and inexperienced farmers/beneficiaries under the Mukhyamantri Niji Paudhshala Yojana, 2023.

3. The petitioner will file an application before the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Bihar, Patna (Head of Forest). If such an application is filed, the respondent No. 6

Patna High Court CWJC No.11564 of 2023(2) dt.04-12-2023 2/2 Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Bihar, Patna will consider the same and enquire into the allegations and act in accordance with law if some substance is found in the allegations levelled by the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Zeevika is not a necessary party in this case and they have been wrongly added as respondents this case.

5. Now this case is being disposed of so there is no need to delete respondent No. 7 from the array of the parties.

6. With the aforesaid directions, this application is disposed of.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U