Gulten Yadav vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 November, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Gulten Yadav vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 18 November, 2011
                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                            Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8447 of 2010
                        Gulten Yadav S/O Sri Kartik Yadav R/O Vill.- Chiraiyadih,
                        P.S.- Belhar, Distt.- Banka

                                                      Versus
                   1.  The State Of Bihar
                   2.    Collector, Banka
                   3.   Deputy Development Commissioner, Banka
                   4.   Block Development Officer Belhar Block, Distt.- Banka
                   5.   Junior Engineer, Belhar Block, Distt.- Banka
                   6.  Block Labour Officer Belhar Block, Distt.- Banka
                   7.  Prahlad Sah S/O Father Name Not Known To The Petitioner
                       Mukhiya, Lorihya Panchayat, Under Belhar Block, Distt.-
                       Banka
                   8. Dinesh Mandal S/O Father Name Not Known To The Petitioner
                       Panchayat-Secretary, Lorihya Panchayat Under Belhar Block,
                       Distt.- Banka
                   9. Sadanand Yadav S/O Father Name Not Known To The Petitioner
                       The Then Mukhiya, Lorihya Panchayat, Under Belhar Block,
                       Distt.- Banka
                   10. Gurieshwar Yadav S/O Father Name Not Known To The
                       Petitioner The Then Panchayat Secretary, Lorihya Panchayat,
                       Under Belhar Block, Distt.- Banka
                                    ----------------------------------

02. 18.11.2011 Mr. Rajiv Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on

behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Assisting

counsel to G.P. 4 for the State.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the irregularities

committed by the Ex- Mukhiya of the Lorihya Panchayat under the

district of Banka and the then Panchayat Secretary in the matter of

construction of a well.

Learned counsel, with reference to an enquiry conducted

by the Labour Enforcement Officer, Belhar placed at Annexure-3 as

also the letter of the Junior Engineer, Belhar placed at Annexure-5,

submits that a bare perusal thereof manifests that some irregularity

has been committed in the matter of construction of well which is

yet incomplete although substantial public money has been spent for
2

construction thereof. He thus submits that even while the local

authorities had attempted to construct a well, the object has not yet

been achieved and the money has been wasted. It is contended that

his representation to the District Magistrate, Banka placed at

Annexure-4 filed in this regard, has remained pending forcing the

petitioner to maintain the writ petition.

Considering the grievance raised by the petitioner and

the fact that the petitioner raises issue of wastage of public money

spent on construction of the well which according to the petitioner

yet remains incomplete, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty

to the petitioner to raise his grievance by filing a fresh detailed

representation before the respondent-Collector, Banka and who shall

consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law

expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from

the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

S.Sb/-                                     (Jyoti Saran, J.)
 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *