BAL KRISHNA YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF PANCHAYATI RAJ AND 5 OTHERS
WPIL/306/2025 · 2025-04-21
Attau Rahman Masoodi, Rajeev Singh
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 131335 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 131335 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22226-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 306 of 2025 Petitioner :- Bal Krishna Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Panchayati Raj And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Salik Ram Tiwari,Arti Yadav,Sanjeev Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
1. Counter affidavit filed by learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional chief Standing Counsel for the State.
3. The order passed by this Court on 3.4.2025 reads as under :-
"Learned counsel for the State prays for and is granted ten days' time to file counter affidavit explaining the position as to what action has been taken against the erring officials who have been stated to have misappropriated the public funds under the scheme of Swachh Bharat Mission (Grameen). The District Magistrate concerned is also directed to explain as to why criminal proceedings have not come to be initiated against the public servants who have been found guilty of misappropriation of public funds, recovery whereof is stated to have been made to the extent of Rs.13,45,000/- until now. List this case in the week commencing 21.04.2025 in the list of fresh cases".
4. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has filed counter affidavit wherein it is stated that the case bearing F.I.R. no. 0112 of 2025 under Section 409 I.P.C., police station Raniganj, district Pratapgarh was lodged on 20.4.2025 against the persons who misappropriated the
public funds and the investigation in furtherance thereof is pending.
5. In view of the action taken by the opposite party no. 2 in the nature of civil and criminal both, the writ petition for an appropriate action against the erring officials seems to have redressed.
6. The writ petition has lost its efficacy and the same is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. . [Rajeev Singh, J.] [Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.] Order Date :- 21.4.2025 kanhaiya Digitally signed by :- KANHAIYA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench