Disposed¶13

Smt. Hemwanti Devi v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2025WPIL/225/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Public interest litigation before Allahabad High Court (DB) challenging Zila Panchayat tender notifications dated 29.11.2024 and 24.12.2024; grievance that tenders worth Rs. 2663.70 lacs exceeded available funds of about Rs. 8.88 crores; counter affidavit by Upper Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Panchayat, Ballia on fund availability; petitioner an elected Zila Panchayat member, political rivalry alleged; court found tenders pertain to development activity, declined to entertain petition, gave liberty to approach competent authority on beyond-means plea; petition disposed of on 9.4.2025; no statute or precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petition disposed of with observations leaving the petitioner free to approach the competent authority in accordance with law on the plea of expenditure/development beyond means.

Smt. Hemwanti Devi vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the Zila Panchayat acted ex-facie contrary to its resources / beyond its means by issuing tenders worth Rs. 2663.70 lacs while having only about Rs. 8.88 crores, warranting restraint from issuing tenders pursuant to the tender notice. +1 more

¶2

Court's answer

The action sought to be taken by the respondents - Zila Panchayat by issuing the tender essentially pertains to development activity, and as claimed in the counter affidavit duly sworn by Upper Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Panchayat, Ballia (a Government servant) regarding availability of requisite funds, the court finds no reason to entertain the petition as filed.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

On the plea pertaining to the respondents seeking to undertake expenses or development work beyond its means, the petitioner is left free to approach the competent authority in accordance with law.

¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

PIL No. 225 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Division Bench: Arun Bhansali, CJ and Kshitij Shailendra, J; Order dated 9.4.2025), filed by Smt. Hemwanti Devi questioning tender notifications dated 29.11.2024 and 24.12.2024 (Annexure-1) issued by the Zila Panchayat, on the submission that tenders worth Rs. 2663.70 lacs were issued although the Zila Panchayat had only about Rs. 8.88 crores. The counter affidavit, sworn by Upper Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Panchayat, Ballia, asserted availability of requisite funds and questioned the petitioner's credentials as an elected member allegedly acting out of political rivalry. The court held the tenders essentially pertain to development activity and found no reason to entertain the petition; on the plea of expenditure beyond means, the petitioner was left free to approach the competent authority in accordance with law. Petition disposed of. No statutes or precedents cited.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:52084-DB

¶2

Chief Justice's Court

¶3

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 225 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Smt. Hemwanti Devi Respondent :- State of U.P. and 6 others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinay Kumar Mishra, Alok Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Anil Tiwari (Sr. Adv.) with Diwakar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶6

This petition, in public interest, has been filed by the petitioner, inter alia , questioning the tender notifications dated 29.11.2024 and 24.12.2024 (Annexure -1 to the writ petition).

¶7

Submissions were made that the respondents - Zila Panchayat has issued tenders wroth Rs. 2663.70 lacs, whereas it only has about Rs. 8.88 crores with it and, therefore, the action of the Zila Panchayat is ex-facie contrary to its resources and, therefore, it be restrained from issuing the tenders pursuant to the tender notice.

¶8

By order dated 19.02.2025, time was granted to counsel for the Zila Panchayat to obtain instructions whether the Zila Panchayat is prepared to scale down the said tenders to the extent of the amount available with it.

¶9

A counter affidavit has been filed, inter alia, questioning the credentials of the petitioner with the submissions that the petitioner herself is an elected member of the Zila Panchayat and only out of political rivalry, the petition has been filed to stop the respondents from undertaking the development work. Qua the allegations made, a chart has been produced as Annexure CA-10 inter alia indicating availability of the funds for undertaking the requisite activity and the chart produced by the petitioner alongwith

¶10

supplementary affidavit has been questioned.

¶11

After hearing counsel for the parties, we are of the firm view that the action sought to be taken by the respondents - Zila Panchayat by issuing the tender essentially pertains to development activity and as has been claimed by filing the counter affidavit, which is duly sworn by Upper Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Panchayat, Ballia, a Government servant regarding the availability of the requisite funds, we do not find any reason to entertain the petition, as filed by the petitioner.

¶12

In so far as the plea raised pertaining to the respondents seeking to undertake expenses or development work beyond its means is concerned, for the said purpose, the petitioner would be free to approach competent authority in accordance with law.

¶13

With the above observations, the petition stands disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 9.4.2025 SL/nd

¶15

(Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SHYAM LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Hemwanti Devi v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Hemwanti Devi v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Durgawati Devi vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Smt. Renu vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Alok Choudhary vs State of Up and 2 Others

Istayak vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

M/S Khaitan Foods India Pvt. Ltd. vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Chuttan vs State of U.P. and 4 Others