Patna High Court
Mukesh Kumar Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 21 January, 2025
Author: Partha Sarthy
Bench: Partha Sarthy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.169 of 2022
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6537 of 2021
======================================================
Mukesh Kumar Singh, son of Late Rameshwar Prasad Singh, Resident of
Village and Post-Amari, P.S.-Dharahara, District-Munger at present resident
of Railway Quarter No. 693/A, Aadarsh Colony, Khagaul, P.S.-Khagaul,
Patna.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary,
Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Joint Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
4. The District Programme Convenor-cum-District Magistrate, Begusarai.
5. The Director, NEP, DRDA, Begusarai.
6. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Begusarai, District-Begusarai.
7. The Programme Officer, Block Begusarai Sadar, Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Prahalad Kumar Bhagat, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.K. Shahi, A.G.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 21-01-2025
Heard Mr. Prahalad Kumar Bhagat, learned
Advocate for the appellant.
2. The appellant, who served as a Junior Engineer
on contractual basis has challenged the judgment dated
Patna High Court L.P.A No.169 of 2022 dt.21-01-2025
2/4
22.02.2022
passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court
in C.W.J.C. No. 6537 of 2021.
3. His services were terminated on 06.06.2015,
whereafter he preferred an appeal which too was rejected.
He preferred the writ petition before this Court only in the
year 2021.
4. The learned Single Judge after referring to the
Supreme Court judgment in Jammu and Kashmir vs.
R.K. Zalpuri, AIR 2016 SC 3006 held that even though
there is no fixed time limit in preferring a writ petitioner but
while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, it is necessary to consider the fact
that the person concerned has invoked the jurisdiction after
undue delay and laches.
5. We have gone through the records of this case
and have found that in an inquiry relating to Scheme No.
15/2008-09 of Panchayat Samiti under the Begusarai
Block, it was found that there was gross illegalities
committed in the completion of work; misuse of
Patna High Court L.P.A No.169 of 2022 dt.21-01-2025
Government funds and violations of the directions and
guidelines of MGNREGA. Based on the aforenoted finding, a
show-cause notice was issued to the appellant by the DRDA
office. The reply of the appellant was not at all satisfactory.
6. There were serious allegations of defalcation of
Government fund. An FIR also had been lodged in
concerned police station against the appellant for preparing
wrong estimate; defalcation of Government fund etc. The
appellant was also found to have remained absent from his
office without permission of the competent authority for two
months after the lodging of FIR.
7. Nonetheless, following all procedures, even a
second show-cause notice was issued to him to which he
had replied but it was found to be without any substance.
8. We have taken note of the fact that under such
circumstances, even on merits, the appellant has no case.
The ground of laches on which his writ petition was
dismissed also is highly justified.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.169 of 2022 dt.21-01-2025
10. There is no merit in this appeal and, therefore,
the same is dismissed.
(Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ)
(Partha Sarthy, J)
krishna/sujit
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 22.01.2025
Transmission Date 22.01.2025
