2026:JHHC:2132 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.158 of 2023 ------ Gupteshwar Prasad, son of Sri Sahebu Bedia, resident of Village Ordana, P.O. Ordana, P.S. Petarwar, District Bokaro, Jharkhand, Pin Code-829121. … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, at Project Building, Ranchi, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi. 2. Principal Secretary, Rural Development, at Project Building, Ranchi, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi. 3. Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, at P.O. & P.S. Dhanbad, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand. 4. Deputy Development Commissioner, Dhanbad, at P.O. & P.S. Dhanbad, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand. 5. Deputy Secretary, Rural Development, at Project Building, Ranchi, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi. 6. Project Officer, MGNREGA, Dhanbad, at P.O. & P.S. Dhanbad, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand. 7. Sub Divisional Police Officer, Baghmara, at P.O. & P.S. Baghmara, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand. 8. Block Development Officer, Baghmara, at P.O. & P.S. Baghmara, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand. 9. Block Program Officer, Baghmara, at P.O. & P.S. Baghmara, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand. … … Respondents ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ritesh Singh, Advocate For the Respondent(s): Mr. Komal Tiwary, AC to AG ------ 04/ 28.01.2026 By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “I) To quash and set aside the Notice/Order vide Letter No. 256 dated 23.12.2022 (Annexure-4) issued by Block Development Officer, Baghmara whereby and where under the Block Development Officer, Baghmara has directed the petitioner to make payment of Rs. 16,32,466/- (Rupees Sixteen Lacs Thirty Two Thousand Four Hundred and Sixty Six only) within one week on 2026:JHHC:2132 2 account of alleged misappropriate of funds whereby and where under an FIR has been registered being Baghmara P.S. Case No.53/2017 in which no evidence was found against the petitioner by the Investigating Agency and the petitioner in the most illegal and arbitrary manner, was directed to deposit the sum of misappropriated fund, as alleged, to the tune of Rs. 16,32,466/- (Rupees Sixteen Lacs Thirty Two Thousand Four Hundred and Sixty Six only) inclusive of interest at the rate of 12% per annum for a period of five years, for the sum of total misappropriation of fund to the tune of Rs.61,21,746/- (Rupees Sixty One Lacs Twenty One Thousand Seven Hundred and Forty Six only) and the same is without any basis, wholly unreasonable, capricious, whimsical, arbitrary and in complete violation of the principles of natural justice as the Impugned Notice is stigmatic and penal in nature and in gross violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. AND (II) Further be pleased to stay/be kept in abeyance the operation of Impugned Notice/Order vide Letter No. 256 dated 23.12.2022 (Annexure-4) issued by Block Development Officer, Baghmara during lis-pendens.” 2. Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner and learned counsel representing the respondents. 3. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned Letter No.256 dated 23.12.2022 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition), whereby the respondents ordered recovery of Rs.16,32,466/- (Rupees Sixteen Lacs Thirty-Two Thousand Four Hundred and Sixty-Six) only, along with 12% interest from the 2026:JHHC:2132 3 petitioner for alleged embezzlement of MGNREGA fund. 4. After this writ petition was filed, this Court vide order dated 10.02.2023, had stayed the recovery. 5. Now a detailed counter affidavit has been filed. In the said counter affidavit, the respondents have taken a specific stand that the Letter No.256 dated 23.12.2022 (impugned Letter), has now been rectified and the petitioner has been directed to submit his defence informing the office in regard to the cause of financial irregularities in implementation of the Scheme like MGNREGA etc., in Daludih Panchayat of Baghmara, and he was asked to cooperate so that the guilty person can be identified. 6. It is the case of the petitioner that he has submitted his reply but thereafter no action has been taken. 7. Considering the stand taken by the respondents, I am of the opinion that at this stage, no order can be passed in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner should cooperate in the enquiry process as directed by the respondents and if there is any subsequent cause of action, it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the same. It is made clear that since the impugned Letter No.256 dated 23.12.2022 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition), has been modified, there is no question of any recovery from the salary of the petitioner. 8. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 28th January, 2026 Prashant. Cp-2 Uploaded on 31.01.2026