IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17100 of 2009 1. M/S RAJU TENT HOUSE, THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR NAMELY MD. AYUB S/O MD. NAIEM R/O MOH- GARERIYA KHAND, P.S- JEHANABAD TOWN, DISTT- JEHANABAD. VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE DIRECTOR PANCHAYATI RAJ VIKASH BHAWAN PATNA. 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE-CUM-DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER (PANCHAYAT) ARWAL. 4. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT RAJ OFFICER, ARWAL. 5. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, BIHAR. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Binod Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. A. Amanullah, G.A.-4. Mr. Arun Kumar Prasad, A.C. to G.A.-4. ------------ 05 05.01.2011 The report from the office of the Accountant General under Reference No. Admn (Au)-CC-132 dated 28.06.2010 has been received pursuant to orders of this Court. The facts are adequately noted therein. It may be recalled that earlier this Court had referred the matter to the State Vigilance which had enquired into the matter and clearly held that the then District Magistrate, Arwal has sworn false affidavit. The matter does not end there. The report of the Accountant General clearly discloses the extent and the reason for this. For three long years the District Magistrate was not in a position to account for over Rs.1 crore which he had received for meeting election expenses, even though he was statutorily required to report expenses on month to month basis. He still to audacity to seek more money and deny payment of people who had supplied goods and services. There appears to be no monitoring much less effective monitoring in this regard. This leads to a lot of improper practices which the Court would not like to enumerate but is clearly understandable. - 2 - I, therefore, direct the I.G. (Vigilance Investigation Bureau), Bihar to take appropriate action in this matter and to whom a copy of the report may also be given. I, further, direct that a copy of the report received from the office of the Accountant General be sent to Chief Secretary for proper action against the officers concerned as also for proper directions safeguarding the State exchequer in such matters. Both communications must be sent by the Registry within two weeks from today through proper channel. So far as the petitioner’s grievance is concerned, in view of the disputed nature of facts, this Court would not proceed any further in the matter. The petitioner would be at liberty to pursue his claims and grievances wherever he is appropriately advised. Let a copy of the order received from the Accountant General be also made available to the learned counsel for the petitioner. This matter stands disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)