MAHENDRA PRASAD, SON OF RAMNANDAN PRASAD SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The argument of learned counsel for the petitioner raised is that huge amount of Rs. 23 crores has been withdrawn from the consolidated fund for unforeseen expenditure and paid to BIT and that 20 acres of land situated in Veterinary College campus have been transferred to BIT on 28.08.2002 without advertisement and tender resulting loss of the Government property. It was pointed that Rs.23 crores transferred to BIT was part of the unforeseen expenditure as defined under Rule 4 of the Bihar Contingency Fund Rule, 1953 and could not be transferred in favour of the BIT.

(3.) The petitioner refers to Annexure-1, Resolution of the State Government wherein the State Government has decided to set up the institutions in the State of Bihar after bifurcation of the State and on creation of separate State of Jharkhand. It is contended that the funds of the State have been given to BIT in violation of the public policy.