IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15061 of 2010 BHARTIYA KRISHI SHRAMIK SANGH THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT BALKRISHNA JHA SON OF LATE NATHO JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- LOSHGHANI, P.S. PIRI BAZAR, DISTRICT- LAKHISARAI. … PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, LAKHISARAI, DISTRICT- LAKHISARAI. 3. THE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, LAKHISARAI, DISTRICT- LAKHISARAI. 4. THE PROGRAMME OFFICER, LAKHISARAI, DISTRICT- LAKHISARAI. 5. THE ROZGAR SEVAK OF SURYAGARHA, P.S. SURYAGARHA, DISTRICT- LAKHISARAI. 6. SUNIL KUMAR SINGH SON OF SRI RAM BAHADUR SINGH EX- MUKHIYA GRAM PANCHAYAT- LOSHGHANI, P.S. SURYAGARHA, DISTRICT- LAKHISARAI. 7. BEDEHI DEVI WIFE OF SRI RAM BAHADUR SINGH, PRESENT MUKHIYA, GRAM PANCHAYAT- LOSHGHANI, P.S., SURYAGARHA, DISTRICT- LAKHISARAI. … RESPONDENTS. ----------- 10. 25.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 in respect of alleged irregularities in MNAREGA scheme. In order to satisfy ourselves as to whether the grievances raised by the petitioner through this Public Interest Litigation require to be taken up seriously in public interest or not, we directed the District Magistrate, Lakhisarai to get the allegations enquired and submit a report to this Court within eight weeks. Pursuant to the order dated 6.1.2011, an enquiry was held on the orders of the District Magistrate by a team of five officials. The report has been brought on record as Annexure-E 2 to the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent No.2, the District Magistrate. That shows many persons whose names were cited on behalf of the petitioner as sufferers of illegality in not paying of unemployment allowances, under MNAREGA Scheme have made a statement that they have paid Rs. 2,00/-(two hundred) per person for filing of this case on the assurance that they will get unemployment allowance of Rs. 8,000/- to 10,000/- per person. The report discloses that some irregularities in execution of some of the schemes were detected and in 2009 a criminal case was lodged by the District Administration against some of the officials. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of private Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 including the present Mukhiya to disclose that petitioner association is not acting bona fide as its president Balkrishna Jha is an accused since 2002 in a case lodged by Respondent No.6, wherein allegedly Respondent No.6 lost his one eye on account of firing made by Sri Balkrishna Jha and some others. The Secretary of the petitioner Association is said to be husband of the Sarpunch of the Panchayat and a litigation is going on between him and the present Mukhiya. It has also come on affidavit that the president of the petitioner association was having a license under the Public Distribution System and the same was suspended in March, 2009 on account of allegations made against him. On behalf of the petitioner, it has been submitted that the enquiry was not impartial as it was influenced by private 3 respondents and against such influence complaint has been made to the higher authorities including the District Magistrate. After perusing the relevant materials, we find that petitioner is not a competent and desirable person for filing a Public Interest Litigation because the dispute appears to be on account of personal differences between two factions of the village. In such circumstances, we are not persuaded to proceed further with the writ petition filed by way of Public Interest Litigation and it is, accordingly, dismissed. Ibrar/- ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) ( Gopal Prasad, J )