SHEO NATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the five petitioners, Mr. Nikhil Kumar Agrawal, learned Assisting Counsel to Government Pleader No.30 for the State, Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, learned counsel appearing for the Bank and Mr. Rajen Sahay, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company.

(2.) The present writ petition is a poor and an apathetic reflection of the manner in which the State Government alongside the Bank and the Insurance Company have dealt with the claim of the poor farmers facing crop crisis in the State which remains pending since 2008-09 i.e. for all the seven years and on non est grounds.

(3.) While the counter affidavits filed on behalf of the respondents cries hoarse on the alleged fraud committed by the petitioners but in my opinion it is a mere ploy to cause harassment to the petitioners and the like at the hands of the executive as well as the insurance company with each shouldering their bit of responsibility on the other. Much has been said about the Welfare Schemes framed by the State to cater to the needs of the needy but the ground reality reflects otherwise and a different situation. In the present case the claims raised by the petitioners have been rejected on technicalities and without verification of the fact situation. The act complained of is an antithesis to a welfare State.