Asef Khan S/O Abrar Khan v. The State Of Maharashtra

2025:BHC-AUG:12135-DB 1 WP / 3036 / 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3036 OF 2025 Asif Khan S/o Abrar Khan .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ...

Advocate for the petitioner : Mr. Sameer Patil AGP for the respondent - State : Ms. P.J. Bharad ...

CORAM

: MANGESH S. PATIL & Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

DATE : 24 APRIL 2025 ORDER (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) :

Heard.

2.

The petitioner alleges that funds provided for undertaking development work by a member of the Rajyasabha, have not been utilized; rather have been mis-utilized and the petitioner is soliciting an enquiry into that.

3.

The learned advocate submits that the work for carrying out construction of the roads was awarded by respondent no. 7 - corporation to respondent no. 8 - contrator. However, after realising that no work was being carried out, the petitioner sought information under the Right to Information Act and found that without verification, the amount was released in favour of respondent no. 8 even when there was no work and is now soliciting an enquiry into that.

2 WP / 3036 / 2025 4.

We have heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and perused the papers.

5.

One need not overemphasize the fact that no one can tolerate any misappropriation. The issue involved is regarding the allegations about the payments having been released to the contractor - respondent no. 8, without he having actually undertaken any work. However, except some bald and omnibus allegations and except the copies of two complaints filed by him with the Chief Engineer of the Public Works Department and the Collector of the District, there is nothing on the record to substantiate the petitioner's allegations. 6.

Apart from the fact that it could be a matter of petitioner's locus standi to seek the relief of writ of mandamus, for want of details and particulars and in the absence of material, in our considered view, it would be hazardous to entertain the petition which has been lodged in a casual manner without any verifiable material. 7.

Keeping open the avenue for the petitioner to pursue with his allegations made to the respondent - authorities, the petition is disposed of.

[ Y. G. KHOBRAGADE ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL ] JUDGE JUDGE arp/