 filed seeking enquiry into the road construction work carried on by an agency in Block Rosera, Motipur Panchayat, District-Samastipur.){kind=link}
The Patna High Court closed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed seeking enquiry into the road construction work carried on by an agency in Block Rosera, Motipur Panchayat, District-Samastipur.
The petition was filed by one Mahmud Alam even without impleading the agency. However, only looking at the report obtained under the Right to Information Act, where there were some defects noticed in the construction, the Court directed a counter affidavit to be filed.
A counter affidavit dated 27.07.2023 is filed on behalf of the respondents and the deponent is the Block Development Officer, Rosera, Samastipur. The deponent has directed the Block Panchayati Raj Officer, Rosera by letter dated 03.02.2022 to take action in view of the report of the Junior Engineer of Rural Work Department, Rosera and the Executive Magistrate, Rosera, who conducted an enquiry on orders of the Sub-Divisional Public Redressal Grievance Cell Rosera.
The Block Panchayati Raj Officer has issued a show cause to the Secretary and Mukhiya of the Panchayat as also the working agency. The Secretary of the Gram Panchayat submitted a reply specifically pointing out that the work carried out in Motipur Village was done under the supervision of the Technical Officer according to the quality standard as per the departmental instructions. Payment was also made on the basis of the measurement book submitted by the Junior Engineer. The Mukhiya submitted a reply dated 19.03.2022 on the same lines. The report of the agency also spoke of the work having been carried out under supervision, but the width in some portions of the road having been reduced for reason of the objection of the local residents. There is a slope made in certain portions for free flow of water which has resulted in the thickness of the road being reduced on the flank side.
It is stated in the counter affidavit that the entire payments were made to the agency in accordance with the measurement book and there was no payment made in excess of the estimate or in excess of the value of the work done.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy noted that an enquiry was conducted by the respective officers and there is no defect found in the construction; nor is any excess payment detected.