Anil Kumar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11999 of 2025 ====================================================== Anil Kumar Mahto Harilal Mahto, Resident of Village- Kullakhas, P.S. Kasba, District- Purnia.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through The Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Director General, Vigilance Depratment, Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Investigation Bureau, Bihar, Patna. 4.

The Divisional Commissioner, Purnia Division, Purnia. 5.

The District Magistrate, Purnia.

6.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Purnia.

7.

The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Purnia.

8.

The Block Development Officer, Kasba, District Purnia. 9.

The Block Panchayati Raj Officer, Kasba, District Purnia. 10.

Sri Ranjeet Kumar Paswan, S/o Sri Fatkan Paswan, Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj Kullakhas, Block Kasba, District Purnia. 11.

The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Kullakhas, Block Kasba, District Purnia.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Paras Mahi, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. J.K. Roy, SC-13 Mr. Arvind Kumar ( Spl. P.P. Vigilance ) Mr. Anil Singh, Advocate ===================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 04-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents-State.

2. The petitioner has filed this writ application for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to get the inquiry done with regard to misuse and

2/4 misappropriation of public money by Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat, Kullakhas, Block and P.S.-Kasba, District-Purnea, namely, against Ranjeet Kumar Paswan, S/o Sri Fatkan Paswan by Vigilance Department for which the petitioner claims to have already been filed an application on 28.08.2024. The petitioner further prays to initiate appropriate legal action against the Mukhiya, namely, Ranjeet Kumar Paswan after he is found guilty in the vigilance inquiry.

3. Learned counsel appearing for Vigilance submits that earlier the wife of the petitioner, namely, Smt. Ful Kumari Devi had approached this Court with a similar prayer vide CWJC No.11195 of 2024. The said writ application was heard at length and by judgment and order dated 29.07.2024 (AnnexureP/26), writ application was disposed of directing the petitioner of that case who happenes to be the wife of the petitioner of the present case to provide all the documents along with the representation to the District Magistrate, Purnea in four weeks. After such a representation, the District Magistrate, Purnea was directed to constitute a committee of senior officials to look into the files and to give personal hearing to Ful Kumari Devi and thereafter, visit the spot in question and submit a report to the District Magistrate, Purena. It was further directed that the copy

3/4 of the inquiry report would be provided to Ful Kumari Devi wife of the petitioner as also to the Mukhiya, namely, Ranjeet Kumar Paswan. After carrying out this exercise the District Magistrate, Purnea was directed to pass a reasoned order.

4. In terms of the aforesaid judgment and order dated 29.07.2024 passed in CWJC No.11195 of 2024 the wife of the petitioner had filed a representation before the District Magistrate, Purnea and thereafter a full-fledged inquiry was conducted as per the directions of this Court and finally a reasoned order was passed by District Magistrate, Purnea dated 08.04.2025 (Annexire-P/29) by which it was found that all the allegations levelled by the wife of the petitioner could not be proved by her and hence her application/representation was accordingly disposed of.

5. After the entire exercise has already been carried out at the behest of the wife of the petitioner and ultimately all the allegations levelled by her could not be established, now a fresh attempt is being made by the husband of Ful Kumari Devi for conducting a vigilance inquiry. It is clear that the petitioner is indulging in witch hunt at the behest of his wife. This writ application is nothing but a second attempt to further harass the elected Mukhiya, Ranjeet Kumar Paswan.

4/4

6. The prayer made in this writ application is with an oblique purpose and motive. For these reasons the present writ application is dismissed.

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) Prakash Narayan U