IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2023 of 2006 VINAY SHARMA, SON OF LATE SURESH CHANDRA SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE & POST- KANCHANPUR, P.S.- BIHTA, DISTRICT, PATNA AT PRESENT POSTED AS EXECUTIVE ENGINNER, WESTERN EMBANKMENT DIVISION, KANAULI AT BIRPUR IN THE DISTRICT OF SUPAUL. ………………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. SRI G.S. KANG, THE CHIEF SECRETARY, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. SRI HEMCHAND SIROHI, COMMISSIONER CUM SECRETARY, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. SRI DEVI RAJAK, ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF (NORTH) WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 5. SRI SHAHABUDDIN KHAN NIZAMI, JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 6. SRI SURYA NARAYAN DAS, DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 7. SRI RAM PRASAD RAM, CHIEF ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES, BIRPUR, SUPAUL. 8. SRI RAJESH KUMAR, SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, BARRAGE CIRCLE, BIRPUR, SUPAUL. 9. SRI JYOTI PRAKASH SINGH, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WESTERN EMBANKMENT DIVISION, KUNAULI AT BIRPUR, SUPAUL. 10. SRI KANHAIYA LAL GOSWAMI, SUB TREASURY OFFICER, BIRPUR, SUPAUL. ………OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- 17 10.11.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional A.G. No. IV on behalf of the opposite parties. To establish non-compliance of the orders of this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner has read out paragraph 9 of the order passed by this Court in the main writ application. In paragraph 9 of the writ application this Court noticed that the flood fighting claims of different divisions were 2 rejected by the Department in the year, 2002 itself. A request for review was also rejected by the Department in the year, 2003 at the Government level. Therefore, there was no occasion to release payment to different divisions in respect of flood fighting claims. In the circumstances, this Court issued the following directions:- “I, accordingly, direct the State Government to look into the matter and take appropriate remedial measures not only to recover the amount, which has been unauthorizedly paid but also to take both civil and criminal action against all those who are responsible for such payment as from the contents of paragraphs 13 and 14 of the counter affidavit of respondent no. 2 itself it appears that the Law Department had advised the department to seek explanation from the Field Officers as to why the norms were violated.” The petitioner filed this contempt application for compliance of the order in letter and spirit, alleging that many high ups in the Department and the Government were 3 involved in that illegal release of payment of claims in spite of rejection of the same in 2003. He also raised a grievance that his name was unnecessarily dragged in criminal proceeding as he was not at all responsible for the release of the said claims. When the case was taken up earlier, after going through the records, this Court was prima facie satisfied that the name of the petitioner has been unnecessarily dragged in the criminal case. Therefore, the learned State Counsel was granted time to seek instruction in the matter. Today, on instruction, learned Additional A.G. No. 4 on the basis of supplementary show cause of the Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, has submitted that the name of the petitioner has been ordered to be withdrawn from the criminal proceeding. It is also submitted that it has been ordered that the criminal proceeding with regard to the other accused should be pursued. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the opposite parties have not said anything with regard to departmental 4 proceeding initiated against the petitioner. He also submits that the persons actually responsible for the release of the claim amounts, who are higher in the Department have been left out free and are not being proceeded with as per the orders of this Court. Therefore, he submits that the direction of this Court “to take both civil and criminal action against all those who are responsible for such payment” has not been complied with. From the order of the Writ Court it is apparent that the persons who are responsible for “such payment” were not identified by this Court and it was left for the opposite parties to identify the individuals and take action against them. It goes without saying that if the records of the Government show that any authority however high or mighty he may be, was responsible for such payment, action was required to be initiated against him also. However, since this Court can not take upon itself to hold an enquiry from the records of the Government to fix up the 5 responsibility and identify the individuals for being proceeded with in the matter, it is difficult to hold that the opposite parties are in contempt and have not complied with the orders of this Court by not identifying any particular individual of the State Government of any level. Now that the petitioner’s name has been ordered to be withdrawn from the criminal proceeding, he gets relief at that stage. As observed earlier, this Court can not hold the departmental proceeding or any preliminary enquiry from the records of the Government to find out and hold that the petitioner was not responsible in the matter in any manner. It is not possible for this Court to give any finding with regard to the correctness of initiation of departmental proceeding against the petitioner or otherwise at this stage. However, before parting with the case, it is observed that the functionaries of the Government shall be well advised to identify the correct persons involved in the matter, and if any one has been left out, he 6 should also be proceeded with in the matter in compliance of the orders of this Court in letter and spirit. With the above observations and directions, this contempt application is disposed of. Arvind/ ( J. N. Singh, J.)