Patna High Court's Division Bench of Chief Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo and Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad delivered a 8-page long judgment on January 16, 2026 in Kumar Sidharth vs. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna. In the 18th judgement authored by Chief Justice Sahoo concluded:"....it is pertinent to mention in this matter that it is not related to Public interest litigation. The writ petitioner filed this matter before this Hon'ble Court regarding a political conflict with the private respondent...3. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and 10 submits that in view of the specific averments made in the counter affidavit, nothing more remains to be adjudicated in this Public Interest Litigation. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the respective parties and after going though the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and 10, the proceeding stands closed granting liberty to the petitioner that in case he wants to agitate any issue(s) relating to financial irregularity in the scheme, he may bring it to the notice of an appropriate Investigating Agency. 5. The writ petition stands disposed of."
The writ petition was filed for directions to the concerned respondents authorities to investigate huge irregularities in the 15th and 6th Finance Bills done by the Panchayat President Saroj Devi of Bhasurari Panchayat, a culvert was constructed near the Khahar Pine, of Chintamanpur village, under Narkatiyaganj Block, District West Champaran although technical administrative approval for said had not been received. More than Rs. 65 lakhs were paid in the account of his brother-in-law Rajesh Pal and brother Munna Pal, in the account of his own relatives, the action of the respondents was not permissible in the eye of law.
The counter affidavit filed by the Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and 10 stated that the writ petitioner was elected to the post of the ward member of ward no 08 of Bhasurari Panchayat of Narkatiaganj Block, District West Champaran, as well as after due process, the writ petitioner was selected for the post of Up-Mukhiya in the year 2021, thereafter, the no-confidence motion has been passed against the writ petitioner dated 15/07/2024, accordingly, the writ petitioner was removed from the post of Up-Mukhiya, after due process the Savitri Devi, i.e., the elected member of the ward no 02, has selected for the post of Up- Mukhiya. It was further submitted that the writ petitioner filed a petition before the Sub-Divisional Public Grievance Redressal Officer, Narkatiaganj regarding the financial irregularities. Thereafter, the SDPGRO, Narkatiaganj, had issued a notice to the respondent no. 10, i.e., the Block Development Officer, Narkatiaganj on September 18, 2024. Accordingly, the respondent no. 10 inquired about the matter through Panchayat Sachiw and submitted the report dated October 18, 2024. After perusal of the report, the SDPGRO, Narkatiaganj, had found that Munna Pal, Rajesh Pal, and others, i.e., the relatives of the writ petitioner, had got work done under various schemes in the Gram Panchayat, due to which the payments of the labourers were made in their accounts. Hence, the SDPGRO, Narkatiaganj, had disposed the case and passed the order dated October 25, 2024.
The writ petitioner had submitted an application before several authorities; accordingly, after the instruction of the competent authority, the respondent no. 05, i.e., the District Panchayat Raj Officer, West Champaran, had constituted a three men inquiry committee. The committee had inquired into the matter thoroughly in the presence of the writ petitioner and found that the private respondent, as well as Panchayat Sachiw, disregarded the departmental order and making the payments of the labours in the accounts of the Munna Pal, Rajesh Pal and others the relatives of the writ petitioner, Respondent no. 11. The committee had submitted its report dated December 30, 2024 with a recommendation to take further action in accordance with the provisions of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act 2006. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated October 15, 2024 passed by the SDPGRO, Narkatiaganj, the writ petitioner had filed an appeal dated November 12, 2024, before the respondent no. 6, i.e., the Additional Collector, Public Grievance Redressal West Champaran cum first Appellate Authority. Thereafter, the respondent no 06 has issued notice to the Deputy Development Officer, West Champaran dated December 17, 2024, Accordingly, after due process, the DDC, West Champaran, had submitted his report dated January 10, 2025.
After perusal of the report, the respondent no. 6 found that already a three men inquiry committee had investigated the matter in the presence of the writ petitioner and submitted his report with recommended further action, and the accompanying documents clearly demonstrate that the culprits had been identified in accordance with the rule and regulations, and the authorities had recommended action against the culprits to the competent authority. Hence, the respondent no 6 had disposed of the first appeal and passed the order dated January 24, 2025. It was further submitted that on the basis of the inquiry report, the respondent no. 05 had issued a show-cause notice dated March 6, 2025 to Dinesh Kumar Pandey, i.e., Panchayat Sachiw, and the Mukhiya Saroj Devi, i.e., the private respondent and Memo dated July 2, 2025. The private respondent had submitted his show-cause reply dated June 2, 2025. Dinesh Kumar Pandey, i.e., Panchayat Sachiw, has submitted his show-cause reply dated July 3, 2025, stating therein that due to unavailability. the labourers's bank accounts their payment had been done in METH's account and labourers had never complained regarding the same as well as Dinesh Kumar Pandey i.e., Panchayat Sachiw had retired on August 31, 2024.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated January 24, 2025, passed by the Additional Collector, Public Grievance Redressal West Champaran cum first Appellate Authority, the writ petitioner has filed 2nd appeal dated March 3, 2025, before the respondent no. 4, i.e., the District Magistrate West Champaran cum Second Appellate Authority. Thereafter, the respondent no 04 had sought a report from respondent no 5. i.e., the District Panchayat Raj Officer, West Champaran dated April 15, 2025. Accordingly, after due process, the respondent no 05 had submitted his report dated May 17, 2025. Hence, the respondent no 4 had passed the order dated May 26, 2025 with direction to the respondent no 5 to take actions against the culprits according to rule and regulations within one month.
In compliance with the order, after the instruction of the competent authority, the respondent no. 10, i.e., the Block Development Officer, Narkatiaganj directed to the Dinesh Kumar Pandey ex-Panchayat Sachiw for recovery of the labour payment from the relative of private respondent and to make payment to the actual labour within seven days and copy served to the at current Pachayat Sachiw for compliance vide Memo dated July 9, 2025, accordingly the on September 9, 2025, one Munna Pal had refunded the labour payment of rupees 67,229.
Justice Sahoo observed:"14. That it is pertinent to mention here that the writ petitioner has falsely mentioned regarding the "culvert constructed near the Khahar Pine of Chintawanpur village under Narkatiyaganj Block, West Champaran that no work has been done by the authority regarding the mention of the writ petitioner. 15. That it is pertinent to mention here that the writ petitioner has also received the rupees 22,060/- (twenty-two thousand sixty rupees), payment of labour and other expenses regarding Yojna no 02/2022-23 (Gram Panchayat ke Gram Tarharwa ke Ward no. 08 me Mandir Prangan me Kuaa ka Jirnodhar Karya)." The Court noted that the petitioner had made some incorrect submissions and had not disclosed that he too had received payment of labour and other expenses.
No comments:
Post a Comment