Raj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14549 of 2015 =========================================================== Raj Kumar, son of Gajendra Rai, resident of villlage- Bakhri, Post- Mirzapur, Police Station- Aahiyapur, District Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.
2. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, East Muzaffarpur.
3. The Circle Officer, Musahari, Muzaffarpur.
4. Mintu Panday, son of Sri Narayan Panday, resident of village- Bakhri (Ttarma) P.S. Aahiyapur, Post Mirzapur, District Muzaffarpur. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mazharul Hassan, Adv. For the State : Mr. Ram Vinay Pd. Singh, A.C. to G.A. XII =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 29-07-2016 Heard parties.
At the time of hearing, petitioner confines this writ petition only for a direction to the Circle Officer, Musahari, Muzaffarpur, to act upon the application filed by the petitioner as contained in Annexure-2.
This writ application is being disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to once again approach the Circle Officer, Respondent No. 3, Musahari, Muzaffarpur, by filing a proper application for initiation of a Proceeding for removal of encroachment from public land concerned. On such application being filed, let the Circle Officer, Musahari, Muzaffarpur, examine as to whether there is
Patna High Court CWJC No.14549 of 2015 dt.29-07-2016 2/2 any encroachment upon a public land and road or not, as has been mentioned by the petitioner. If he comes to the conclusion that there is some encroachment in public land, then he will be required to initiate a proceeding and bring that to a logical conclusion within a period of four months from the date of filing of such application. It is made clear that this Court has not formed any expressed opinion on the merit of the case and, as such, reasonable opportunity should be given to all concerned including the Respondent No. 4.
(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) S.Ali/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A.
Uploading Date 17/09/2016 Transmission Date /09/2016