PIL 45/2008 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.KATAKEY Ranjan Gogoi, J Heard Mr M Sarania, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr DC C hakraborty, learned Central Govt. counsel; Mr K Das, learned Standing Counsel, B TC and Mr PS Deka, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam. 2. As already recorded in the earlier order of the Court dated 4.5 .2010 the issues arising in this PIL relate to inadequate notice of the developm ental schemes included in the annual plan of Kachugaon Development Block for the years 2006-07 and 2007-08. According to the petitioners, on account of lack of due and proper publication of the various developmental works included in the an nual plan the job card holders were not able to apply for the employment guarant eed by the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (now Mahatma Gandhi Rur al Employment Guarantee Act). In the PIL filed, it has also been alleged that on ly about 15,000 persons have been provided job cards against about 40,000 who wo uld be so entitled and further that some of the job cards distributed have been tempered with by the Block Development Officer, Kachugaon i.e. the respondent No .7. The denial of guaranteed employment and non-payment of unemployment allowanc e under the Act has also been highlighted in the present PIL. 3. By the order dated 4.5.2010 on consideration of the pleadings co ntained in the PIL and the counter affidavits filed information was sought for b y the Court on the following issues:- 1. The names of the developmental works/ projects included in the Annual Action Plan of Kachugaon for the year 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 that had been notified t o enable persons eligible and registered under the Act to apply for employment; 2. The number of persons who had applied for employment under the Act be it for 100 days or for any shorter duration in respect of the projects included in the Action Plan and duly notified; 3. The number of job card holders who were provided employment and the percentag e thereof again the number of job cards issued; 4. The number of persons who have not been provided with job cards though regist ered under the Act and the reasons therefor; 5. The number of persons who have been issued duplicate job cards which had ove rwritings and temperings thereon and the reasons therefor; 6. The number of persons entitled to unemployment allowance under the Act and nu mber of persons to whom such unemployment allowance had been provided; 7. The total cost incurred in the projects including the cost incurred in accou nt of wages and the total payment made to job card holders entitled to guarantee d employment under the Act who reside within 5 km of the site of the development al works/ projects. 4. Thereafter, a report dated 8.6.2010 was submitted to the Court b y the Deputy Commissioner, Kokrajhar whereby the information sought for by the o rder dated 4.5.2010 had been sought to be furnished. As per the said report date d 8.6.2010 all developmental projects included in the annual plan of the years 2 006-07 and 2007-08 of the Kachugaon Development Block were duly published and ou t of the total 27,969 job card holders only 6863 Nos. applied for jobs of durati on less than 100 days. In the said report the contention of the petitioners with regard to denial of job cards to the persons entitled had been stated to be inc orrect as also the allegations with regard to tampering of the job cards. Accord ing to the Deputy Commissioner, as all the persons who had sought employment by submitting applications had been provided with such employment, the question of payment of unemployment allowance under the Act does not arise. The details of t he cost incurred as sought for by the Court by its order dated 4.5.2010 had also been furnished. The above information, it may be noticed, has been submitted se parately for the annual plans of the year 2006-07 and 2007-08. 5. On consideration of the aforesaid reports, this Court by order d ated 23.6.2010 directed the Deputy Commissioner to make a field verification, pa rticularly, with regard to the engagement of job card holders and the number of days for which work was provided and the payments received. Thereafter, the Depu ty Commissioner was required to co-relate the information collected from the fie ld with the official records and submit a further report to this Court. 6. Pursuant to the order dated 23.6.2010 the Deputy Commissioner, K okrajhar has forwarded a report dated 21.7.2010 which has been placed before us. We have perused the same. In the said report, at the outset, the Deputy Commiss ioner has mentioned the records which were verified by him pursuant to the order of the Court. The said records are as follows:- (i) Annual Action Plan 2006-07 (2nd Installment); (ii) Annual Action Plan 2006-07 (State Share); (iii) Annual Action Plan 2007-08 (2nd Installment); (iv) Annual Action Plan 2007-08 (3rd Installment); (v) Job Card Register; (vi) Notice inviting application for job to the Job Card Holders; (vii) Master Rolls; (viii) Employment Register; and (ix) Asset Register. 7. The Deputy Commissioner in his report has further stated that wi de publicity of the various schemes of the two annual plans was made, both in Bo do and Assamese language. It has been further stated in the said report that in the annual action plan of the year 2006-07 a total of 199 schemes were involved and the field verification made by him had shown engagement of 6863 Nos. of job card holders who had applied out of the total number of 27,969 job card holders who were registered in respect of the Kachugaon Development Block. In respect o f the annual action plan for the year 2007-08, according to the Deputy Commissio ner, 10,421 Nos. of job card holders had applied for job and were provided emplo yment. Such employment, according to the Deputy Commissioner, for both the annua l plans was for a total of 50 days at the rate of Rs. 66/- and 69/- per day. In the report the Deputy Commissioner has also mentioned that he had personally ver ified 52 Nos. of schemes in the field in addition to 79 other schemes which were verified by one of his Addl. Deputy Commissioners, Sri A.K. Brahma who had subm itted a separate report in this regard. The findings of the field verification h ave been appended in a separate schedule (Annexure-III) to the report of the Dep uty Commissioner which findings are supported by pictorial evidence. The Deputy Commissioner in his report has also stated that his personal interaction with th e job card holders had satisfied him that they were provided employment at the r ates already mentioned though the precise period of such employment could not be stated by the job card holders on account of efflux of time. The approximate nu mber of days for which they were employed as stated by them was, however, close to what was revealed by the official records. In the report of the Deputy Commis sioner some of the schemes which were not successful i.e. Community Fishery Tank and Eco Hatchery at Mora Gurufela River at Kopragaon village under Gardenpur VC DC and Irrigation Project at River Kristi have also been mentioned. 8. The report of the Deputy Commissioner which is before us as well as the findings of the spot verification in respect of as many as 131 different items of work indicates that the grievances of the petitioners are not based on correct facts. Though a copy of the said report along with the enclosures there to had been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioners, none of the fa cts stated in the report or the statements appended thereto have been controvert ed by the petitioners. The petitioners have also not brought any specific incide nt of illegality or irregularity in the execution of the different schemes under the NREGA. 9. In the aforesaid circumstances, we are of the view that no usefu l purpose would be served in pursuing this PIL any further. We are, consequently , of the view that this PIL may be ordered to be treated as closed. Ordered acco rdingly.