Disposed

Dhirendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC7 Apr 2014CWJC/5272/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Public Interest Litigation alleging irregular allotment of works under National Rural Health Scheme leading to misappropriation of public money. Court directed District Magistrate to complete enquiry and take corrective action for loss to Government before disposing of petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to District Magistrate to complete enquiry into allocation of works and loss to Government with corrective action.

Dhirendra Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Public Procurement and Tenders | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5272 of 2014

¶2

====================================================== 1. Dhirendra Kumar Son Of Sri Suresh Prasad Singh Resident Of Chanakyapuri Colony, Gaya, Police Station- Rampur In The District/TownGaya

¶3

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶4

Versus

¶5

1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Health Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Principal Secretary, Health Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Development Commissioner-Cum-Chairman, State Health Society, Government Of Bihar, Patna 4. The Executive Director, State Health Society, Bihar, Patna 5. The Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya 6. The District Magistrate-Cum-Chairman, District Health Society, Gaya 7. The Regional Deputy Director, Health Services, Magadh Division, Gaya 8. The Civil Surgeon-Cum-Chief Medical Officer-Cum-Secretary, District Health Society, Gaya 9. The District Programme Manager, District Health Society, Gaya 10. The District Account Manager, District Health Society, Gaya 11. The Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare, Government Of India, New Delhi 12. The Director, National Rural Health Mission, New Delhi 13. The Central Bureau Of Investigation, New Delhi Through Its Director 14. The Director, Central Bureau Of Investigation, New Delhi

¶6

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Devendra Kr Sinha, Mr. Gautam Sinha, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER

¶7

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA) 2 07-04-2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. In this Public Interest Litigation the grievance was with regard to allotment of different works under the National Rural Health Scheme (N.R.H.M.) by the District Health

¶8

Patna High Court CWJC No.5272 of 2014 (2) dt.07-04-2014

¶9

2/3

¶10

Society contrary to law and procedures leading to large scale misappropriation of public money, as alleged.

¶11

Our attention has been invited inter alia to letters dated 14.9.2014 and 18.10.2013 written by the Regional Deputy Director, Magadh Division, Gaya to the Civil Surgeoncum-Secretary, District Health Society, Gaya pointing out the irregularities and directing corrective action to be taken.

¶12

The counter affidavit on behalf of the official respondents-8 to 10 states that pursuant to letters of the Regional Deputy Director, Magadh Division, Gaya and after enquiry the District Magistrate, Gaya on 12.12.2013 has cancelled all works allotted to 11 tenderers given work orders contrary to law as pointed out by the Regional Deputy Director and fresh tenders have been ordered. Fresh tender notice was published on 26.1.2014 and 1.3.2014. Out of 19 tenderers, 8 have qualified and were found fit in the technical and financial bid. Further information has been sought with regard to the numbers of hours for which the generator had been used. That the hepatitis-B Programme was not a separate programme but it was run under the routine immunization programme for which vaccines were provided by the Health Department. It is also pointed out that the petitioner is also a drug supplier under the name of “Supra Laboratories”.

¶13

The status of the petitioner does not appear to be

¶14

Patna High Court CWJC No.5272 of 2014 (2) dt.07-04-2014

¶15

3/3

¶16

directly relevant if the irregularities noticed by the Regional Deputy Director have been found to be correct and necessary action has already been taken.

¶17

The only appropriate order to be passed now is to direct the District Magistrate to complete the enquiry with regard to the allocation of works made earlier without following procedures and the loss that may have been occasioned to the Government with necessary corrective

¶18

action.

¶19

The Public Interest Litigation is disposed.

¶20

(Navin Sinha, J)

¶21

(Vikash Jain, J)

¶22

K.C.jha/-

Dhirendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhirendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.Prabhakar Sinha Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Satish Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Bajrang Kumar Sah Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Chandra Shekhar Azad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Uday Singh and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Binod Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.