IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16549 of 2010 1. DEVANAND RAY S/O LATE MADHAV LAL RAY R/O HANSPOSE TOLA, DHANANDAHA, P.S.YOGWANI, DISTT-ARARIA ...Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH COLLECTOR ARARIA 2. CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF BIHAR, SECRETARIAT, PATNA 3. HOME SECRETARY GOVT. OF BIHAR, SECRETARIAT, PATNA 4. COMMISSIONER PURNEA COMMISSIONARY, PURNEA 5. COLLECTOR ARARIA, DISTT-ARARIA 6. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER FARBISGANJ BLOCK, FORBISGANJ, DISTT-ARARIA 7. KAPILESHWAR YADAV, RAJASWA KARAMCHARI MATIYARI GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ MATIYARI, P.S.FARBISGANJ, DISTT-ARARIA 8. MUKHIYA MATIYARI GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ MATIYARI, P.S.FORBISGANJ, DISTT-ARARIA 9. ANUSHRAWAN SAMITI, PANCHAYAT RAJ MATIYARI, P.S.FORBISGANJ, DISTT-ARARIA ........Respondents ----------- 4 03-01-2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has preferred this writ petition in public interest. He has prayed for ordering an enquiry into various alleged acts of irregularity or illegality in utilizing public funds for payment of compensation in the district of Araria, particularly in Farbisganj block, to the farmers whose crops were allegedly damaged in flood. In recent times, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of public interest litigations requesting this court to order for such enquiries. In many cases enquiries were ordered. At times it resulted in 2 action but if such enquiries are made a routine matter, it has the potential of obstructing public interest because the officers like District Magistrate/Collector have to spare their valuable time in holding such enquiries and the concerned officers get busy in defending themselves in enquiries to the detriment of official duties. Therefore, a balance has to be struck. We are of the considered view that in majority of cases where the acts of omissions or commissions are of general nature, the District Magistrate or other concerned officer should take remedial action and if the acts amount to embezzlement or crime then law should be set in motion by filing First Information Reports. Both kinds of actions can be taken effectively by the District Magistrate or the officer concerned who are in a better position to decide what matters need to be enquired into on account of their seriousness and magnitude. In rare cases where the extent of embezzlement is large and the allegations are specifically against higher officials then this court may interfere in public interest. In the present case we find that allegations are 3 of vague and general nature and there is nothing unusual to warrant interference in public interest. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed but with liberty that petitioner may approach the District Magistrate or any other concerned official who will act in the matter as per their own wisdom. BKS/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)