The Patna High Court in the case Mahendra Singh vs The State of Bihar and Others observed and has dismissed the Public Interest Litigation, PIL wherein seeking to issue the direction for constructing the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan of Gram Panchayat Raj in Amaithi, at Sasaram in the village of Masona.
The petitioner, named Mahendra Sing, who being the resident of Masona, argued before the court that construction should be prioritized in his village due to its higher population as compared to Susadi village.
The court in the case observed that the decision taken with regards to the construction of government buildings, such as the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan, are within the purview of the concerned state authorities and the same cannot be the subject of a Public Interest Litigation, PIL.
The bench comprising of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy in the case observed that the appropriate authority for deciding the place of construction of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan would be the concerned Department of the State of Bihar and/or the local administration and it is for this reason that even the letter dated November 26, 2019, wherein it provides that the said decision has to be taken by the concerned District Magistrate.
Further, the court stated that the decision taken with regards to construction of Government Buildings like the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan etc., which is carried out in the furtherance of the policy decision of the State Government cannot be a subject matter of public interest litigation.
Furthermore, the petitioner in the plea submitted that the directive had been issued by the Principal Secretary of the Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar, in a letter to all District Magistrates in the state. Thus, the letter issues instructed the construction of a Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan at the headquarters of every Panchayat and, in the absence of government land, suggested constructing it in another village with a higher population.
However, the report submitted by Circle Officer of Sanjhauli, Rohtas to the District Magistrate of Rohtas, Sasaram, wherein it is stated that Masona village had a higher population compared to Susadi village and suitable land was available for construction. The public petition was also filed in in the month of April, 2023, highlighting the matter.
It has also been stated in the petition wherein It is alleged that the authorities were not taking any action, and consequently, he resorted to filing the PIL.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case stated that it is acknowledged that although it is correct that a letter was written by the Principal Secretary of the Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar to all the District Magistrates for establishment of a Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan at the headquarters of all the GramPanchayats, however at the same time from perusal of the said letter which has been brought on record, the same transpire that the same is in the form of a guideline to the respective District Magistrates.
