Khurshid Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10250 of 2023 ====================================================== Khurshid Alam Son of Md. Salimuddin, Resident of Village- Garhara, P.S.- Brouni, District- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary , Department of Revenue, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate cum Collector, Begusarai. 3.

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Begusarai.

4.

The Sub Divisional Public Grievances Officer, Begusarai. 5.

The Circle Officer, Brouni, Begusarai.

6.

Md. Khalil Son of Late Siddiki, Resident of Village- Garharara, P.S.- Brouni, Begusarai.

7.

Md. Rakim Son of Late Siddiki, Resident of Village- Garharara, P.S.- Brouni, Begusarai.

8.

Md. Rahuf Son of Late Siddiki, Resident of Village- Garharara, P.S.- Brouni, Begusarai.

9.

Md. Koushar Son of Late Liyakat, Resident of Village- Garharara, P.S.- Brouni, District- Begusarai.

10.

Md. Amir Son of Liyakat, Resident of Village- Garharara, P.S.- Brouni, District- Begusarai.

11.

Md. Sadam Son of Md. Khalil, Resident of Village- Garharara, P.S.- Brouni, District- Begusarai.

12.

Md. Shajid Son of Md. Khalil, Resident of Village- Garharara, P.S.- Brouni, District- Begusarai.

13.

Md. Shakil Son of Late Salouddin, Resident of Village- Garharara, P.S.- Brouni, District- Begusarai.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shashi Bhushan Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Rishi Raj Sinha ( Sc 19 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-11-2023 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. This writ application has been filed for direction to the respondents to remove the encroachment from the raiyati

Patna High Court CWJC No.10250 of 2023(2) dt.02-11-2023 2/2 land of the petitioner which has been encroached by the private respondents.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that it is a dispute between private parties with regard to property rights, which is purely a civil dispute for which a regular suit in a competent civil court is the only remedy.

4. Considering the nature of dispute raised by the parties, such disputes are required to be adjudicated on facts and evidences. The factual controversy cannot be adjudicated by High Court in a writ petition.

5. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shishir/- U