High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 11 PAT CK 0005

Arvind Prasad Sah, Son of Sri Madan Prasad Sah vs The Union of India

Patna High Court · Decided on 3 November 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ahsanuddin Amanullah
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
6363 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

35 paragraphs · 514 words
1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2.

The petitioner has moved the Court for the following

reliefs:

"i) For a direction upon the respondents authorities to produce a copy of the list of beneficiaries of all the fourteen Gram Panchayats of Adapur Block, District East Champaran Motihari, randomly selected by the Block Development Officer, Adapur Block, District East Champaran Motihari and after production thereof same may be quashed as the respondent Block Development Officer, Adapur Block as he himself admitted that he selected the name of beneficiaries randomly as per the advice of the senior respondents authorities and ignored the priority list provided by the seventeen Panchayat, duly determined and decided by the concerned Gram Sabha. The entire list is fit to be quashed as same is in teeth of and in gross violation of the conditions envisaged in Letter No. 276296 dated 24.06.2016 issued by the Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, which clearly mandates that the priority list shall be prepared/determined only by the Gram Sabha of the concerned Gram Panchayat. ii) For any other relief/reliefs for which petitioner may be deemed entitled too."

3.

The basic contention of the petitioner is that without

following the guideline issued by the Rural Development

Department, Government of Bihar, Patna contained in Letter No.

276296 dated 24.06.2016, the final priority list of beneficiaries of

Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna (Gramin) has been done.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

before preparation of the final priority list, there are intermediary

steps and at such level objections are to be received so that there is

no discrepancy and only genuine persons get such benefit, but in the

present case, the same has not been done resulting in many errors,

including inclusion of persons, who are dead.

5.

Learned counsel for the State, on the basis of the

materials brought on record in the counter affidavit and

supplementary counter affidavit, submitted that the petitioner is the

elected Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj Harpur, under Adapur

Block in the district of East Champaran and in that capacity, he has

signed on the auto/system generated final selection list of the year

2016-17 for the beneficiaries prepared under the aforesaid scheme,

which has also been approved by the Gram Sabha in his presence,

and thus, he cannot now raise questions about the same.

6.

Having considered the matter, the Court does not find

any occasion to interfere in the matter on the simple ground that once

the petitioner has agreed to the final selection list of beneficiaries, he

cannot raise a plea that the intermediary process, prior to finalization

of the final selection list, has not been followed. The petitioner

stands estopped from raising such issue as he himself has signed on

the final selected list and once the same has been done, it is deemed

in law that he has not objected and rather has consented to/approved

of the procedure, which was required to be gone into prior to

issuance of the final selection list.

7.

In view thereof, the writ petition stands dismissed.