Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Asok Kumar Hatua vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 6 August, 2018
Author: Tapabrata Chakraborty
Bench: Tapabrata Chakraborty
1
06.08.2018
Item No.46
ad
W.P No. 12288(W) of 2018
Asok Kumar Hatua
- Versus -
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharyya,
Mr. Swapan Kumar Pal
... For the petitioner
Ms. Chaitali Bhattacharyya,
Mr. Kartick Ch. Kapas
... For the State
Affidavit-of-service filed by the petitioner be kept on record.
The writ petition has been preferred primarily praying for the following
relief:
"a) A writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent
authorities particularly the respondent no.4 being the district magistrate, Purba Medinipur to appoint your petitioner as executing agency for the purpose of construction of school building with classroom, laboratory and library of Khamarchak High School."
Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the Headmaster of Khamarchak High School (in short, the said school). The respondent no.5 issued a letter dated 26th October, 2017 to the respondent no.4 intimating that Smt. Roopa Ganguly, Member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha) has recommended a proposed amount for the year 2016-17 under Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (in short, MPLAD Scheme) for a work proposal towards construction of the school building 2 including classrooms, laboratory and library of the said school. Subsequent thereto, by a memo dated 6th July, 2018 issued by the respondent no.4 administrative approval and financial sanction was accorded to such recommendation. In a previous work proposal the petitioner was appointed as the Executing Agency and he successfully completed such work, as would be explicit from the document at page 22 of the writ petition. The petitioner, accordingly submitted a representation to the respondent no.4 on 10th July, 2018 to engage him as the Executing Agency pertaining to the work proposal of the year 2016-17. The said representation was not considered and aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court Ms. Bhattacharyya, learned advocate appearing for the State respondents submits that it is the absolute discretion of the respondents to appoint the Executing Agency pertaining to any fund sanctioned under the MPLAD Scheme and the petitioner cannot claim any absolute right towards such appointment.
From the records as produced on behalf of the State respondents it appears that the recommendation under MPLAD Scheme issued by the Member of Parliament was accorded administrative and financial sanction by a memo dated 6th July, 2018 and in respect of the work towards construction of the said school building with classrooms, laboratory and library, the Executive Officer, Tamluk Panchayat Samity was engaged as the Executing Agency. The said memoranda dated 26th June, 2018 and 6th July, 2018 as produced be kept on record.
3
The grievance of the petitioner is that though he had successfully utilised an earlier amount sanctioned under the MPLAD Scheme in favour of the said school, the authorities have not considered his claim towards engagement as the Executing Agency pertaining to the subsequent work proposal.
According to the petitioner, the authorities are under an obligation to engage the petitioner as the Executing Agency towards utilisation of the fund sanctioned under MPLAD Scheme. Such argument is not acceptable to this Court. Having once been engaged as the Executing Agency, no absolute right was conferred upon the petitioner to continue as the Executing Agency for utilisation of any subsequent fund recommended under MPLAD Scheme. The discretion which has been exercised by the competent authority towards engagement of the Executing Agency is neither arbitrary nor unreasonable and no legally protected right of the petitioner has been infringed.
In the said conspectus, this Court is reluctant to exercise any discretion in favour of the writ petitioner and the writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
Photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties on compliance of all formalities.
(Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)