IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14242 of 2010 ANUMANDALIYA GARIWAN MOTIA PALLEDAR SANGH through its Secretary Basudeo Yadav son of late Kishun Yadav, Office at Naya Bazar Lakhisarai, P.S. Lakhisarai, District Lakhisarai … … Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through Principal Secretary, Child Development Project, Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, 2. The Director I.C.D.S. Directorate, Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, 3. The District Magistrate, Lakhisari, District Lakhisarai, 4. The District Development Officer, , Lakhisari, District Lakhisarai 5. The District Welfare Officer, Lakhisari, District Lakhisarai 6. The District Programme Officer, Lakhisari, District Lakhisarai 7. Mamta Verma, The Child Development Project Officer, Lakhisari, District Lakhisarai … ….. Respondents ….. 8 04.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for private respondent no. 7. The petitioner is a Sangh, which has preferred this Public Interest Litigation through one Basudeo Yadav, who claims to be the Secretary of Anumandaliya Gariwan Motia Palledar Sangh making allegation against respondent no. 7, who is Child Development Project Officer, Lakhisarai, that mid-day meal programme was not properly running and funds have been misappropriated. 2 In fact, this is the third writ petition, the earlier two cases filed as Public Interest Litigation were disposed of at the initial stage by directing the authorities to give required information to the petitioner and to act in accordance with law. In the present writ petition, the State has filed two counter affidavits and Annexures A and B have been annexed to show that two other persons claim to be the Chairman and the Secretary of the Sangh and that Basudeo Yadav is not the Secretary. Some facts have been also brought in paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit to support a plea that respondent no. 7 is being harassed unnecessarily because she had taken action against one Anganwari Sevika, namely, Vandana. Be that as it may, the public interest element has already been served because through supplementary counter affidavit the State has disclosed that due to various reasons the bills for fund to run the mid-day meal scheme were not encashed in time, and, therefore, for some period the scheme had suffered in some centres. It appears that a show-cause notice has been given to respondent no. 7 and a circular letter has also been issued by the District Magistrate, Lakhisarai, directing all the Child Development Project Officers in the District to ensure that the 3 funds are available in time and the scheme does not suffer. There can be no dispute that mid-day meal scheme is meant to encourage the children in rural areas to attend the school and gain literacy and hence, the District Magistrate appears to have taken corrective steps. However, we would like to observe that report should be obtained from a responsible officer on the line of the report available in Annexure E to the counter affidavit of the State at periodical interval of four or six months to ensure that the scheme is being implemented in a proper manner. Since the relevant facts to serve the public interest have come on record, we do not propose to go into the issue as to whether the claim of Basudeo Yadav of being the Secretary of the Sangh, is correct or not. We have a suspicion that dismissal of one Anganwari Sevika has led to filing of the writ application in the garb of Public Interest Litigation, but that issue also need not be gone into at this stage. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. SC (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)