Binda Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13570 of 2023 ====================================================== Binda Devi Wife of Sri Bhagnath Ray, Resident of Village- Vishunpura, Jalalpur Kalan, Bishunpura, Police Station- Sidhwaliya, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Division Commissione, Saran Division, Chapra. 3.

The District Magistrate, Siwan.

4.

The District Planning Officer, Siwan.

5.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Maharajganj, Siwan. 6.

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Maharajganj, Siwan. 7.

The Circle Officer, Lakri Nabiganj, Siwan.

8.

The Officer-In-Charge Lakri Nabiganj Police Station, District- Siwan. 9.

Brijnandan Singh @ Pappu Singh, Son of Shri Rajeshwar Singh, Resident of Village- Talimpur Mathia, Anchal - Lakri Nabiganj, Police Station- Jamo Bazar, District- Siwan.

10.

Jitendra Singh @ Guddu Singh, Son of late Ramji Bhagat, Resident of Village- Talimpur Mathia, Anchal - Lakri Nabiganj, Police Station- Jamo Bazar, District- Siwan.

11.

Rajeshwar Singh, Son of Late Jagarnath Singh, Resident of VillageTalimpur Mathia, Anchal - Lakri Nabiganj, Police Station- Jamo Bazar, District- Siwan.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Umesh Kumar Mishra, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Raj Kishore Roy GP- 18 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 08-01-2024 Heard the parties.

2. This writ application has been filed for a direction upon the respondent authorities to stay the construction work of Community Hall proposed to be built up from the fund of Member of Parliament, Maharajganj, Siwan as the land over which the proposed Community Hall is to be built up is a

Patna High Court CWJC No.13570 of 2023(2) dt.08-01-2024 2/2 Gairmajarua Aam Land and is being used by the petitioner and other family members since long for free passage of their house.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner is herself not assure about the encroachment of free passage.

4. From reading of Annexure-2 annexed with the writ petition, it appears that it is a private dispute between the petitioner and the private respondents. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interefere in such kind of private disputes in the name of encroachment.

4. This writ application is dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Court for appropriate relief.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) N.K/- U