High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ramjee Singh vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 7 February, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Ramjee Singh vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 7 February, 2011
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CWJC No.2530 of 2006
         RAMJEE SINGH SON OF LATE RAM PRATAP SINGH @
         PRATAPI SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- SULTANPUR
         POLICE STATION- DESARI, DISTRICT- VAISHALI.
                                             .... PETITIONER.
                                      Versus
           1. THE STATE OF BIHAR.
           2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR.
           3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VAISHALI AT
               HAJIPUR.
           4. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, SAHDAI BUZURG, VAISHALI.
           5. SRI UPENDRA THAKUR SON OF LATE NAWLAKH
               THAKUR
           6. SRI PRAKASH NARAIN SETH SON OF LATE SHAM
               PRASAD SINGH (KHATRI)
           7. SRI RAJ NARAIN SINGH SON OF DEO NARAIN SINGH
           8. SRI NAWAL KISHORE SINGH SON OF JAGDISH SINGH
           9. SRI MURLIDHAR SINGH@ MURLIDHAR
           10. SRI DHARNIDHAR SINGH
           11. GANGADHAR SINGH
               RESPONDENT NOS. 9 TO 11- SONS OF MAHESH PRASAD
               SINGH (KHATRI)
           12. YOIGENDRA SINGH SON OF LATE RAM PRASAD SINGH
               RESPONDENT NOS 5 TO 12 RESIDENT OF VILLAGE
               SULTANPUR, POLICE STATION- DESARI, DISTRICT-
               VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR.
                                                   .. RESPONDENTS.

                                        -----------

2. 07.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

State.

2. Petitioner has filed this writ petition alleging

encroachment by Private Respondent Nos. 5 to 12 over

plot no. 2736 of village Sultanpur which according to the

petitioner is a village road. In this connection Anchal
2

Amin was directed to submit report which has also been

submitted and is dated 10.6.2005. Later, the Circle

Inspector approved the report of the Anchal Amin under

his recommendation dated 14.6.2005. It is submitted on

behalf of the petitioner that in spite of aforesaid report of

the Anchal Amin and the recommendation of the Circle

Inspector steps for removal of encroachment by Private

Respondent has not been taken. This matter is pending for

about four years yet no counter affidavit has been filed.

3. Having heard counsel for the parties, it is

directed that the Circle Officer, Sahdai Buzurg in the

District of Vaishali should look into the report of the

Anchal Amin and the recommendation of the Circle

Inspector contained in Annexure-3 and pass appropriate

orders and also ensure removal of the encroachment as

early as possible, within two months from the date of

receipt/production of a copy of this order before the Circle

Officer, Sahdao Buzurg, Vaishali.

Ibrar/-                                     ( V. N. Sinha, J.)