Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
7125W/2015 on 23 June, 2015
Author: Sambuddha Chakrabarti
Bench: Sambuddha Chakrabarti
1
21 23.6.201 WP 7125(w) of 2015
7 5
Mr. Pradip Kumar Ghosh
... For the Petitioner
c.l
Mr. Amitava Chaudhury
Mr. A. Kar Gupta
... For the Nadia Zilla Parishad
ar Let the affidavit of service filed in Court be
kept with the record.
Heard Mr. Pradip Kumar Ghosh, the learned
advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Amitava
Chaudhury, the learned advocate for the Nadia
Zilla Parishad.
It is the case of the petitioner that under
Nirmal Bharat Abhian, a project for solid and
liquid waste management, a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs
was allotted to the petitioner Panchayat for
implementation of the project. This amount was
placed to the petitioner Panchayat in March
2013.
Since no progress had been made from the
petitioner's side the Prodhan of the concerned
Gram Panchayat was requested by the authority
of the Nadia Zilla Parishad by a letter dated June
30, 2014 to refund the said amount to the Zilla
Parishad. That not having been done, the
respondent no. 3 had sent a reminder on March
2
09, 2015 requesting the Prodhan of the said Gram Panchayat to return the said amount to the Zilla Parishad as per the decision of the concerned Esthyee Samity.
This notice is under challenge in this present writ petition. It appears that the threat of a proposed legal action was the main causative factor behind moving the writ petition. The petitioner has tried to justify the non- implementation of the scheme as well as the non-utilisation of the money through various ways including the Parliamentary election that had taken place in May 2014.
Mr. Chaudhury has drawn my attention that such amount was supposed to be utilised by March 31, 2014 and since no progress had been made by the petitioner the Zilla Parishad had constrained to ask for the refund of the money. The reasons sought to be canvassed by the petitioner appear to be absolutely unconvincing for the sustenance of the writ petition. After all, the money was allotted to the concerned Zilla Parishad both by Government of India as well as the State Government for implementation of a scheme known as Nirmal Bharat Abhijan. The petitioner Panchayat had received the 3 amount in March 2013 and has done nothing towards its utilisation. Any further delay in the implementation of the scheme is likely to go against the public interest at large for which the project was envisaged. The interest of the public being the most supreme consideration I find no reason to entertain this writ petition and to allow the petitioner to sit on the amount for sometime more.
I find nothing in the petition to interfere. The writ petition is devoid of all merits and is hereby dismissed.
The respondents will be at liberty to take appropriate steps against the petitioner in case the amount allotted to the petitioner Samity is not refunded as per their notice.
There shall be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertaking.
(Dr. Sambuddha Chakrabarti, J.) 4