Calcutta High Court Orders DM To Probe Alleged Embezzlement Of Public Funds By Self-Help Group Tasked With Producing School Uniforms

The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a PIL challenging alleged embezzlement of public funds to the tune Rs 8.8 crores allocated to self-help group ‘Milan Mohila Mahasanga’ in Uttar Dinajpur, for manufacturing of school-uniforms.

A division-bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya directed the District Magistrate to look into the allegations. It held,

“Admittedly the project for supply of uniforms, is one of the State government. If there is any allegation of embezzlement of public funds, obviously, the authority shall look into the same. As we are disposing of the petition without calling for affidavits, and without going into the allegations made by the petitioner, we direct the DM, Uttar Dinajpur, to take into account the petitioners earlier representation, issue notice to parties and consider whether the allegations made by the petitioner are true or not. An order on the same be passed by the DM within 8 weeks from date.”

Petitioner argued it appeared from bank statements that the office bearers of the aforesaid group had withdrawn “crores of rupees in a single day” and had thereby siphoned public funds allocated by the State.

State counsel argued that the group had supplied the uniforms as had been requisitioned by the State, and that the transactions being referred to in the petition were from the private bank account of the office-bearers, which the State had no role in. State further argued that the petitioner’s complaint was that the funds of the NGO were being siphoned off, and that such funds had no commonality with those allocated by the State.

Upon noting the submissions, the Court perused the complaint filed by the petitioner before the DM, and noted that there could have been an enquiry initiated by the DM on the allegations raised by the petitioner.

Accordingly, in refuting the petitioner’s prayer to keep the matter pending due to the District Magistrate being ‘overburdened,’ the Bench remarked:

“Let the DM at least inquire into the issue. If we have to issue notice to forty respondents…let the DM look into it. You cannot say what sort of orders we should pass. Court is also overburdened…be satisfied with this at the admission stage, since you are getting it. State shall consider…it’s a scheme floated by the government. If there is any misappropriation, State can obviously enquire.”

Case: Zainul Haque v State of WB & Ors

Coram: Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 261