Ram Babu Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12622 of 2024 ====================================================== Ram Babu Mahto S/o Late Ram Deni Mahto R/o village- Ram Nagar, P.S.- Siwaipatti, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Divisional Commissioner, Muzaffarpur.

4.

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

5.

The S.D.O, Meenapur, Muzaffarpur.

6.

The Circle Officer, Meenapur, Muzaffarpur.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Mujtabaul Haque, GP-12 Mr.Manish Kumar, AC to GP-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 07-10-2024

1. Though, the present writ petition has been filed for restraining the respondents from demolishing the house of the petitioner, situated at Mauza-Ramnagar, Khata No.203, Khesra No.234 and for staying the notice dated 24.07.2024, issued by the Circle Officer, Meenapur, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Encroachment Case No.04 of 2024-25, however, at the outset, the learned counsel for the respondents has submitted by referring to the counter affidavit, filed in the present case that the Circle Officer, Meenapur, Muzaffarpur has already passed the final order under Section 6(1) of the Bihar Public Land

Patna High Court CWJC No.12622 of 2024(4) dt.07-10-2024 2/2 Encroachment Act, 1956, on 18.07.2024, hence in case the petitioner is so aggrieved, he may file appropriate appeal under Section 11 of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956.

2. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to challenge the aforesaid order dated 24.07.2024, by filing appropriate appeal, however, seeks some protection during the interregnum period. Liberty so sought is granted.

3. It is needless to state that status quo existing as on today qua the land/house of the petitioner in question shall be maintained for a period of six weeks from today, in order to enable the petitioner to file appropriate appeal and seek interim relief.

4. The writ petition stands disposed off on the aforesaid terms.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Saurav/- U