IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11450 of 2008 ANITA DEVI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 7. 22.01.2009 Heard learned counsel for the parties on the show cause submitted on behalf of respondent no. 14, Block Development Officer-cum-Executive Officer, Gopalpur. In the said show cause the stand has been taken that so far as the alleged interpolation on the receipt of the registered letter is concerned, the same on having been received in the Block office on 30.6.2008 under acknowledgement receipt bearing no. 4979 by a clerk Awadhesh Jha, was handed over to the petitioner on 1.7.2008 by the peon, namely, Suresh Paswan at her residence since she was not making herself available in the office. It is alleged that the said peon has informed that the petitioner after putting the signature and date on the receipt asked him to see the date again and she made certain corrections in the said receipt and added a ‘0’ before the digit of date ‘1’ in front of the peon. It is further alleged that the notice was served upon the petitioner in village home where there is no photostat shop and it is not known how the photostat copy has been procured by the petitioner. The petitioner has also filed a rejoinder to the said show cause in which it is stated that apprehending foul play she had got a photocopy of the receipt dated 11.7.2008 but no answer is given to the fact that as to where the photostat had been done. The original receipt as pasted on a register maintained in the Panchayat Samiti has - 2 - also been produced in the Court by learned counsel for the State. On a consideration of the various materials on the record and considering the unbecoming role of the petitioner in the present matter when she had allegedly refused to receive the requisition which led the situation that the same was being sent to her repeatedly by the requisitionist members, two of them having been sent to her at her home address under registered letters bearing receipt nos. 4976 and 4977 and the third one, namely, the present registered letter under consideration under registered receipt no. 4979 at the office of the Panchayat Samiti. The further two requisitions sent directly to her home were not received by the petitioner and on the contrary a certificate granted by the postman has been annexed as Annexure-8 to the rejoinder to the counter affidavit in which it was stated that the registered letter being registration no. 4976 was returned since the addressee was not available. All these go to show the crooked and sly manner in which the petitioner was herself proceeding in the matter. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court does not find it appropriate to rely solely upon the statements made by the petitioner against respondent no. 14, the Block Development Officer- cum-Executive Officer of the Gopalpur Panchayat Samiti. The show cause of respondent no. 14 is accordingly accepted and the matter is dropped. S.Pandey (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)