IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC NO.589 OF 2009 SURYANENDU NATH SINGH @ PURNENDU NARAYAN SINGH, SON OF SRI SHASHI SHEKHAR NARAYAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SINGHAUL, P.S. SARMERA, DISTRICT NALANDA….....................PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NALANDA, BIHAR SHARIF 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NALANDA, BIHAR SHARIF 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, NALANDA (BIHAR SHARIF) 5. THE AREA EDUCATION OFFICER, BIHAR SHARIF 6. SRI SHAMBHU SHARAN PRASAD, BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, SAREMRA, NALANDA 7. SMT. REKHA DEVI, WIFE OF SRI RABINDRA PRASAD, MUKHIA, GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ SASAUR, BLOCK SARMERA, DISTRICT NALANDA 8. SRI BINOD YADAV, SON OF LATE CHHOTAN YADAV, RESIDENT OF SASAUR, P.S. SARMERA, DISTRICT NALANDA……………………..RESPONDENTS --------- 3. 13.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. It appears that one first information report was lodged against the petitioner, who happened to be the Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Sasaur at that time, and one Panchayat Sewak on the allegation of making appointment of Shiksha Mitra on the basis of interpolation and fraud made by them in the register of Sukh Suvidha Committee. The case was investigated and it was found that allegation levelled in the F.I.R. was mistake of fact. Accordingly, investigation of - 2 - the case was closed and a report was submitted showing the case as a mistake of fact. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact, signature of the petitioner was forged on the document by his successor and other persons of the Panchayat against which petitioner has already filed a complaint before the District Superintendent of Education, Nalanda, but no action is being taken against them on the basis of the same. Whether the respondents will take action on the complaint of the petitioner against persons, who allegedly forged the signature of the petitioner on the documents, is concern of the respondents. It goes without saying that if the respondents are satisfied, they can take action by initiating criminal as well as civil proceeding against persons concerned. This Court cannot direct them to take action in the matter and in a particular manner. The writ application is, accordingly, dismissed. B.T (J. N. Singh, J.)