IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13733 of 2010 ================================================ SUBODH KUMAR, son of Sheela Chandra Das, resident of Par Nawad, Dobrapur, P.S. and District – Nawada ………. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, New Secretariat, Patna, 2. The Deputy Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, New Secretariat, Patna, 3. The District Magistrate, Nawada, 4. The Chairman, District Board, Nawada, 5. The Deputy Development Commissioner cum Chief Executive Officer, District Board, Nawada, 6. Nagar Parishad, Nawada, 7. The Chief Councilor, Nagar Parishad, Nawada, 8. The Deputy Chief Councilor, Nagar Parishad, Nawada, 9. The Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Nawada … Respondents. ================================================ Appearance: For the petitioner: Mr Ramesh Prasad Singh, Mr Singh Sanjay Kumar and Mr Ujjwal Kumar Sinha, Advocates. For the State: Mrs Namrata Mishra, GP IX. =============================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2. 23.08.2010. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is brought in Public Interest by one of the councilors of the respondent Nawada Nagar Parishad. The petitioner challenges the decision of the Nagar Parishad to undertake certain developmental work 2 for construction of roads, Nala, etc. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the funds settled by the State Government for the benefit of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes people are diverted for the aforesaid developmental work. No benefit is extended to the real beneficiary, i.e. Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes people. It may be noted that the petitioner is also a party to the decision to undertake certain developmental work; may be that he had a minority dissenting note. If he is aggrieved by a particular decision of the Nagar Parishad, he may have remedy before the appropriate forum. However, a Public Interest Litigation by one of the councilors challenging the decision of the Nagar Parishad to which he is a party is not maintainable. Petition is dismissed in limine. Dilip ( R. M. Doshit, CJ) ( Jyoti Saran, J)