PIL 7/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.MADAB B.LOKUR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. BARUAH (Madan B. Lokur, CJ) The grievance of the petitioner is that the Backward Region Grant Fund S cheme 2009-2010 is being implemented through the Zilla Parishad in terms of Reso lution No.1 of the meeting of the District Planning Committee, Goalpara held on 4th December, 2010. This Resolution reads as follows :- Resolution No.1 :- In view of over burden of work of BDOs office & GP office du e to timely completion of flagship programme like NERGA, IAY and other special p rogramme of CM, the Committee decided to execute the works through the ZP machin ery except the individual scheme which has estimated value beyond Rs.15 lacs and also requires highly technical know how and constant technical supervision by t he competent technical authority. In case of individual work having estimated va lue beyond Rs.15 lacs and requires constant technical supervision, the committee decided to execute such work through the concerned Govt. line deptt. like PWD, PHE, Agriculture etc. The Committee also decided to execute the earth filling sc heme and installation of hand tube well, Tara pump, Ring well etc. irrespective of cost value through the ZP machinery as the execution of work do not require a ny high level of technical know how. . The aforesaid Resolution makes it absolutely clear that in view of the o ver burden of work of Block Development Officers and other officers, for timely completion the work the Zilla Parishad has been entrusted with execution of the work except individual schemes which have an estimated value beyond Rs.15 lacs. According to the petitioner, this is in violation of the guidelines of t he Backward Region Grant Fund Scheme 2009-2010. Apart from the fact that above guidelines referred to by learned counsel have no statutory or binding force, learned counsel has not been able to show a ny guideline to the effect that the Zilla Parishad has no power to execute the w orks awarded to it. While development work is going on, and it should be encouraged, the petitioners are wanting to stop the activity. This is rather unfortunate. There is no merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.