IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7557 of 2010 Sudhanshu Kumar Singh s/o Sumitra Nandan Singh, r/o village – Guriya, P.S. Lakshmipur, District - Jamui Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Chief Engineer – 1, Gramin Karya Vighag (Rural Works Department), Bihar, Patna 2. The Chief Engineer -1, Gramine Karya Vighag (Rural Works Department), Bihar, Patna 3. District Magistrate, Jamui 4. Superintending Engineer, Gramine karya Vibhag (Rural Works Department), Works Circle, Bhagalpur 5. Executive Engineer, Gramine Karya Vibhag (Rural Works Department), Works Division, Jamui ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Advocate For the State: Mr. A. Amanullah, SC XVII 2 30/4/2010 By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: I. For Commanding and directing the respondents to construct the proposed bridge (NIT No.1/2009-10, at Serial no.13, issued at the instance of respondent no.5) at river Jamkhar at Village Guriya, P.S. Lakshmipur, District – Jamui, at its present/old road rather to any new place. II. For commanding and directing the respondents to not shift the construction of said new proposed bridge from the usual and existing road of the village Guriya situated at the southern side of the village (Khasra no.463), which suits almost all of the villagers. It is being enjoyed by the villagers since time immemorial. III. For commanding and directing the respondents to ensure that the proposed bridge should be constructed at a place where most of the villagers would be benefited, rather to a place where few influential people would be benefited. IV. For commanding and directing the respondents to ensure that the construction cost, which will come from Government Exchequer, 2 should be spent for the benefit of public at large rather for few influential people of the village Guriya, P.S. Lakshmipur, District – Jamui. V. For any other relief(s) for which petitioner is found entitled in the eye of law.” In support of the aforesaid reliefs the following grounds have been urged: “I. Whether, respondents are knowingly deviating from the actual site of the proposed bridge of village Guriya, P.S. Lakshmipur, Jamui? II. Whether, the respondents are trying to shift the old way of egress and ingress of the village by constructing the proposed bridge at a far distant place (Northern end of the village) with a view to oblige few influential person of the village? III. Whether, respondents have right to construct a bridge, being constructed from the fund of Government Exchequer, at a place of their choice rather at a usual way of egress and ingress of the villagers? IV. Whether, the very act of the respondent is sustainable in the eye of law? V. Whether, the respondents are, by shifting the usual way of egress and ingress of the villagers, depriving the people of village Guriya, P.S. Lakshmipur, District – Jamui from their right to way? VI. Whether, on account of shifting of the proposed site of bridge the most of the Mahadalit and downtrodden family of the village would have to use a much longer way of conveyance? VII. Whether, the school and electoral booth of the village are standing at the present way of conveyance? VIII. Whether, the shifting of proposed site of bridge, would occasion unnecessary hardship to the villagers, they will have to cover up a long way? IX. Whether, a huge amount of public money should be utilized for the benefit of few influential people of the village? X. Whether, respondents, being functionaries 3 of a welfare state despite valid service of notice, has right to avoid a proceeding instituted under Section 144 of the Cr. P. C. in this matter? XI. Whether, the State respondent has been exempted from obeying any order of a court of our land? XII. Whether, non appearance of the respondents before the court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jamui speaks about their mala fide intention and also about their high handed approach in discharging their duty as government official? XIII. Petitioner craves for indulgence of this Hon’ble Court to raise some more grounds at the time of hearing of this petition.” On a perusal of the relief clause and the grounds mentioned, we are really perplexed how such a litigation can be filed describing it as a public interest litigation. We condemn and decry such practice. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed in limine. Neyaz/ ( Dipak Misra, CJ.) (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)