Judgment Heard Mr. R.N. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner, who has presented himself as a human rights activist devoted to the cause of the weaker sections of the society, more particularly, the women and children, seeks the intervention of this Court to restrain the opposite party No.1 i.e. State of Odisha from conducting the Concurrent Monitoring Evaluation of the Mid-Day-Meal in the State through an agency, named, ‘Centre for Youth and Social Development (CYSD), Bhubaneswar’. 3. The petitioner has stated that the Mid-Day-Meal scheme in Odisha is afflicted with severe malpractice, corruption and mismanagement to the great detriment and hazard of poor children mostly belonging to Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste and inhabitants of remote rural areas. Noticing the rampant illegalities and grave violation of child rights, the petitioner has in the meantime approached and registered proceedings with the National Human Rights Commission; Odisha Human Rights Commission; Odisha State Commission for Protection of Child Rights etc., which are pending. He has averred that in all such cases these forums have taken various measures by issuing notices, calling for action taken report, directing personal appearance, computation and release of interim compensation etc. The petition discloses that the proceedings pending before these forums relate to the Mid-Day-Meal Scheme involving various institutions situated in different districts of the State, to name a few, Ayodhyanagar Primary School in Kendrapara, Project Upper Primary School at Gandabahal in Sonepur district, 105 Upper Primary Schools in Dhenkanal district, Bartana UGME School under Bhograi Block in Balasore district, Kaumaara Govt. Girls High School in Mayurbhanj district and other locations as detailed in the writ petition. He has admitted that the complaints made by him (petitioner) in all those proceedings have been taken note of by the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi and the proceedings are pending. It is, in this backdrop, that the petitioner has denounced the concept of Concurrent Monitoring Evaluation of Mid-Day-Meal in the State and that too through the agency i.e. Centre for Youth and Social Development (CYSD), Bhubaneswar, which according to him is a dubious organization having the potential, amongst others, of rendering the proceedings before the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi infructuous and also of facilitating wastage of public money. The learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the above. The learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the above. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and on a consideration of the pleaded facts and documents appended to the writ petition, which, per se demonstrate that the proceedings initiated by him with regard to the alleged anomalies and illegalities in the Mid-Day-Meal Scheme in the State are pending, amongst others, before the National Human Rights Commission, we are of the opinion that any intervention by this Court at this stage vis-à-vis issue of Concurrent Monitoring Evaluation lodged by the Government would result in overlapping of jurisdictions and multiplicity of forums on cognate issues, which, in our opinion is both inadvisable and inexpedient. In our comprehension, as various proceedings, pertaining to the imputations relatable to the conduct of the Mid-Day-Meal Scheme in the State are presently pending in various forums including the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi, which is in full seisin thereof, it would be appropriate if the petitioner, if so advised, lay his cavil pertaining to Concurrent Monitoring Evaluation before the same forum to avoid plurality of adjudication. With the aforesaid observation, the petition is closed. We make it clear that we have not, for the reasons stated hereinabove, adjudicated the issues raised in this proceeding on merits.