IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.17105 of 2009
1. RUPESH KUMAR S/O RAJENDRA PRASAD SINGH, R/O VILL-
PARGHARI, P.O- BAMDEO, P.S- RAJOUN, DISTT- BANKA
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. THE COLLECTOR, BANKA, DISTT- BANKA
3. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, RAJOUN, P.S- RAJOUN, DISTT- BANKA
4. NARAYAN SINGH S/O SARAB LAL SINGH R/O VILL- PARGHARI ,
P.S- RAJOUN, P.O- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA
5. UMESH SINGH S/O SAHDEO SINGH R/O VILL-PARGHARI, P.S-
RAJOUN, PO- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA
6. JANARDAN SINGH, S/O SANTU SINGH R/O VILL- PARGHARI,
P.S- RAJOUN, P.O- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA
7. ANIL SINGH S/O SAHDEO SINGH R/O VILL- PARGHARI, P.S-
RAJOUN, P.O- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA
8. DILIP SINGH S/O SAHDEO SINGH R/O VILL- PARGHARI, P.S-
RAJOUN, P.O- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA
9. LAKHAN YADAV, S/O KESHO YADAV, R/O VILL- PARGHARI,
P.S- RAJOUN, P.O- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA
-----------
2. 14.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner
and the State.
The grievance of the petitioner is that
notwithstanding the report of Anchal Amin dated
5.10.2007 with regard to an encroachment on a
public road by certain person on lands of Khata No.
308, Plot No. 504 having an area of 49 decimals in
village Parghari, Thana No. 600, P.S. Rajoun,
District- Banka, no action was being taken by the
respondent authorities to remove the encroachment.
This Court is disturbed by the manner in
which citizens have to approach the Court seeking a
direction against the State officials for performing of
what are otherwise normal executive duties. If the
2
petitioner had only alleged encroachment and
enquiry was required, matters may have been
different. But if what the petitioner contends is
correct and the Anchal Amin has submitted a report,
surely the report was not meant to be locked up in
the cupboard but was required to be acted upon by
the District administration without waiting for
direction of the Court.
Let the District Magistrate examine issues
and ensure that the majesty of the law is upheld
and, if satisfied direct proceedings under the Land
Encroachment Act before the appropriate authority
and concluded by taking the same to its logical
conclusion within a maximum period of three
months from the date of receipt/production of a copy
of this order before him.
Needless to state that any such proceeding
has to be after hearing all concerned including those
who may be affected by any such order.
The writ application stands disposed.
P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)