Mahendra Dayal, J. - (1.) I have heard Sri Bireshwar Nath, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Ratnesh Chandra learned counsel for the opposite parties and also perused the record.
(2.) The revisionist has challenged the order dated 05.11.2016 passed by the Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, C.B.I. (Central), Lucknow in C.B.I. Case No. RC 10(A)2014 whereby the applications filed by the opposite parties have been allowed and the opposite parties have been discharged from the offences under Sections 409, 420, 471 read with Section 120-B IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1) (D) P.C. Act.
(3.) It has been argued by Sri Bireshwar Nath learned counsel for the revisionist that the case relates to large scale misappropriation of fund as well as abuse of power under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme by the opposite parties and others. A Division Bench of this Court while deciding Writ Petition No.12802 (M/B) of 2011, passed a very detailed order directing the C.B.I. to investigate the abuse and misappropriation of fund as well as the abuse of power under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Guarantee Scheme with regard to seven districts of State of U.P. in the year 2007 to 2010. It was further directed that the C.B.I. shall hold a preliminary enquiry with regard to other districts of State of U.P. relating to abuse, misuse or misappropriation of fund provided by the Government of India. The State Government was also directed to provide necessary assistance to the C.B.I. to proceed for investigation in pursuance of the judgment. The C.B.I. was directed to submit report to the Court every three months with regard to progress of? investigation.;