PIL 26/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTG.) MR. A.K. GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.R. SARMA The issue raised in this Public Interest Litigation ( PIL ) arises out of implem entation of Syndai Park Project on the Indo-Bangladesh Border. The project was i nitiated by the Border Development Department of the Government of India. The la nd for the project was donated by the villagers with the expectations that the d evelopment of the area may also generate employment for them. The Central Govern ment sanctioned first installment of the cost of the project. During execution o f the project, there was allegation of misappropriation of funds by Shri TTC Mar ak, IFS, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Territorial), Meghalaya, which led to filing of FIR dated 17.1.2010 under Section 409 IPC with Dawki Police Sta tion. The FIR was lodged by the President of War Jaintia Student Union and Presi dent of Jaintia Youth Federation. The basis of the FIR, inter-alia, was the repo rt of the Comptroller and Auditor General for the year ended on 31.3.2009. According to the petitioner, the State Government was not taking appropriate act ion against the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Territorial), and the pr oject was abandoned midway. Direction was sought for an expeditious independent investigation and for revocation of promotion granted to Respondent No.10. The matter was considered from time to time and finally on 19.9.2011, it was not ed that investigation had been completed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CID, Meghalaya to whom the investigation was transferred. Accordingly, directio n was issued to the Border Development Department of the Central Government to c onsider revival of the project which had been stopped midway on account of alleg ed misappropriation of funds and inform this Court about the decision taken and the State Government was directed to take action on the report submitted by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Centra l Government, learned counsel for the State of Meghalaya and learned counsel for Respondent No.10. The stand of the State Government is that it is not in agreement with the report of the Investigating Officer. Learned counsel for the Central Government states that no decision has so far been taken in pursuance of the order of this Court for revival of the project. He, however, states that decision in pursuance of th e order of this Court dated 19.9.2011 will be taken within one month from today. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that since investigation is complete, the report of the Investigating Officer has to be considered in accordance with law by the concerned Magistrate, notwithstanding the opinion of the State Govern ment. In view of the fact that report of the Investigating Officer is to be considered by the concerned Court, we refrain from making any observation on merits. The I nvestigating Officer may submit the report to the concerned Court. The concerned Court may decide the matter in accordance with law. This PIL stands disposed of accordingly.