High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Sudarshan Prasad vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 30 September, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Sudarshan Prasad vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 30 September, 2010
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                           CWJC No.2099 of 2010
                   Sheo Nath Prasad S/O Ramswaroop Prasad R/O Vill- Karnpura, At
                   Present Majhagarh Nai Bazar, P.S Manjha Garh, Distt- Gopalganj.
                                                                             ..... Petitioner.
                                                     Versus
                   1. The State of Bihar.
                   2. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj.
                   3. Sub-divisional Officer, Gopalganj.
                   4. The Circle Officer, Manjhagarh, Distt- Gopalganj.
                                                                           ....Respondents.
                                                      -------

For the petitioner : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mukund Mohan Jha, A.C. to S. C. 7
With
CWJC No.1971 of 2009
Sudarshan Prasad, Son of Suraj Prasad, resident of Village- Jantolli
(Manjha), P.S.-Manjha, District-Gopalganj.

… … Petitioner.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Circle Officer, Manjha Block, Gopalganj.

…. … Respondents.

For the petitioner : Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Bijay Kumar Sinha, A.C. to G.P.6.

———–

07/ 30.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner in both the

cases as well as learned counsel for the respondents- State of Bihar

and its authorities in both the cases.

2. CWJC No.2099 of 2010 has been filed on behalf of

petitioner Sheo Nath Prasad at whose instance Encroachment Case

No.01 of 2007-08 was initiated by the Circle Officer, Manjha

within the district of Gopalganj for removal of alleged

encroachments by several persons, including the petitioner of

CWJC No.1971 of 2009 with respect to Plot No.3692, Khata

no.845 of Village Manjha Garh under Thana no.184 in the district

of Gopalganj. The grievance of the petitioner of this case is that the

aforesaid authority is not proceeding with the encroachment case
-2-

although inquiry has been made as far back as on 26.02.2009

(Annexure-6).

3. CWJC No.1971 of 2009 has been filed by one of the

alleged encroachers, who are opposite parties in Encroachment

Case No.01 of 2007-08, challenging notice dated 24.04.2007

(Annexure-1) in which neither number of the case nor the land

involved had been mentioned. Similar to the aforesaid notice dated

24.04.2007, another notice dated 26.02.2009 is annexed in CWJC

No.2099 of 2010 as Annexure-9 which was issued to the alleged

encroacher and in that notice also number of the encroachment

case has not been mentioned.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case

as well as the materials on record and the averments made by

learned counsel for the parties, it is quite apparent that

Encroachment Case No.01 of 2007-08 was initiated at the instance

of petitioner of CWJC No.2099 of 2010 against several alleged

encroachers, including petitioner of CWJC no.1971 of 2009 and in

that proceeding preliminary inquiry has already been held on

26.02.2009 (Annexure-6 of CWJC No.2099 of 2010), whereafter

notices were sent. However, the materials on record clearly show

that notices sent by the aforesaid Circle Officer to the alleged

encroachers are defective as they do not contain the number of

encroachment case which is pending against them and other

details.

5. Accordingly, the notices sent by the said authority to
-3-

the alleged encroachers in the aforesaid Encroachment Case No.01

of 2007-08 are hereby quashed and the Circle Officer, Manjha

within the district of Gopalganj is directed to issue fresh notices

with the required details to the alleged encroachers within fifteen

days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

Thereafter the said proceeding should be expedited in accordance

with law so that it may be decided without any further delay,

preferably within a period of four months from the date of notice.

6. With the aforesaid direction/observation, both the

aforesaid writ petitions are disposed of.

(S. N. Hussain, J.)

Sunil