IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.10297 of 2010 ==================================================== Devanand Singh S/O Kailash Singh R/O Vill.- Malikpura, P.S. Goraul, Distt.- Vaishali. …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Commissioner and Secretary, Planning And Development Department, Bihar, Patna 2. The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur 3. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Vaishali at Hajipur 4. The District Engineer, Vaishali at Hajipur . …. …. Respondents ==================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajeev Ranjan 1, Advocate with Mr. Sudhir Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Shambhu Nath, A.C. to G.P.-10 ==================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 4.. 8.9.2010. Heard the learned Advocates. This petition has been filed by one Devanand Singh in public interest to challenge the decision of the respondents to carry out the development work through the District Board. It is the grievance of the petitioner that entrustment of the work to the District Board is in contravention to the Government notification dated 1.10.2005. The petition is contested by the State Government. The State Government has filed the counter affidavit to say that the District Board is a Government agency and that the petitioner is a contractor having registration No. 2108/2009. - 2 - It is apparent that this petition has been filed for extraneous purpose and not in public interest. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate that appointment of the District Board for execution of the development work under the Rashtriya Sum Vikas Yojna is prejudicial to the people in general. On the contrary, the petitioner appears to be vitally interested. The petition in the nature of public interest for ventilating a personal grievance or personal vendetta is not maintainable. The petition is summarily rejected. The petitioner will pay a cost of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent no.4 within four weeks from today. In the event the petitioner fails to pay the cost as directed, the respondent no.2 will recover the same as arrears of land revenue. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Jyoti Saran, J)