Siya Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.483 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7849 of 2017 ====================================================== Siya Devi W/o Sri Sanjay Kumar R/o Village- Bankipur Gorakh, P.S.- Fatuha, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Collector Patna Sri Ravi Kumar 2.

The Additional Collector, Patna, Sri Rajesh Roshan 3.

The Sub Divisional officer, Patna City, Sri Yogendra Singh 4.

The Circle Officer, Fatuha Sri Shailesh Kumar 5.

Vijay Sahni son of Late Dayanand Sahni R/o Sammaspur, P.S.-Futuha, District Patna 6.

Rajesh Sahni son of Late Dayanand Sahni R/o Sammaspur, P.S.-Futuha, District patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Shankar Das, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Khurshid Alam (AAG-12) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 15-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The allegation made in this contempt application is of non-compliance of the judgment dated 22nd June, 2017 where a direction had been issued for removal of encroachment. A show-cause has been filed wherein it has been stated that one Meena Devi had purchased land from one Kaushlendra Kumar

Patna High Court MJC No.483 of 2019 dt.15-07-2019 2/2 Singh whose Jamabandi had been cancelled. Notices were issued to Meena Devi whereafter she had filed Title Suit No. 202 of 2019 and an injunction order has been passed by the learned Sub-Judge -I, Patna on 2nd July, 2019. With regard to the second encroachment it has been stated that one Radha Paswan was identified as having encroached public land to the extent of 0.02 acres (2 decimals). The Circle Officer issued notices and has passed orders on 27th June, 2019 for removal of the encroachment. In our considered opinion, the directions dated 22nd June, 2017 have been substantially complied with. The petitioner may approach the appropriate authorities in the event the encroachment still continues and requires execution.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ) ( Anjana Mishra, J) Jagdish/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 16.07.2019 Transmission Date