Disposed

Binod Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC13 Aug 2021CWJC/4428/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court dismissed the writ petition regarding misappropriation of funds for a ward scheme. Petitioner was directed to file a representation before the District Programme Officer, who must dispose of it within two months.

What did the court decide?

Permission to file representation before the District Programme Officer; direction to the District Programme Officer to dispose of the same within two months.

Binod Mahto Vs The State of Bihar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4428 of 2021

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Binod Mahto Son of Late Ram Chandra Mahto Resident of Village- Thahra Gopalpur, P.S.- Waini (O.P.), District- Samastipur.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar Through Principal Secretary, rural Development Department, Old Secretariat, Patna.

¶7

The District Magistrate Samastipur.

¶8

The District Programme Officer Samastipur.

¶9

The Block Development Officer Samastipur at Pusa.

¶10

The Junior Engineer Pusa Block, Samastipur.

¶11

The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj Thahra, Samastipur.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Singh, Mr. Shanti Bhushan Singh, Advocates. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, AC to AAG-6 ======================================================

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶15

2 13-08-2021

¶16

Heard Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Singh, learned counsel for

¶17

the petitioner and Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, learned AC to AAG-6 for the State.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the basis of scheme passed by Ward Execution and Management Committee of Ward Nos. 9 and 10, the fund was released for execution of the scheme but Respondent No.6, Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Thahra, Samastipur did not complete the scheme in Ward Nos. 9 rather the fund was used for execution of scheme for another ward i.e., Ward Nos. 10 and 10(II).

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.4428 of 2021(2) dt.13-08-2021 2/2

¶20

Learned counsel for the State submits that from the perusal of the writ petition, it appears that petitioner has not filed representation before competent authority, the District Programme Officer. As such, this writ application can be disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a representation before the competent authority.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this writ application is disposed with a permission to the petitioner to file representation before the competent authority i.e., the District Programme Officer within four weeks from today and if such representation is filed, the District Programme Officer, Samastipur is directed to disposed of the same within a further period of two months in accordance with law.

¶22

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶23

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

¶24

perwez

¶25

Binod Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binod Mahto v. The State of Bihar

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

Dileep Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Narayan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Chini Ram Vs Nagar Parishad, Raxaul

Sh. Mandeep Vs Indian Institute of Technology Patna

Rubi Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Saneha Kumari Vs The State of Bihar