Surendra Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14307 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.

Surendra Prasad Singh Son of Ram Lakhan Singh Resident of Mohalla Vivek Vihar P. O. and P S Mohanpur, District - Samastipur. 2.

Sanjeev Kumar Gupta Son of Shyam Kishore Sah Resident Ward No.-72/07 P.S.-Kashipur, District-Samastipur.

3.

Amar Kumar Roy Son of Ashok Kumar Roy Resident of Mohalla-Veer Kunwar Singh Colony, Ward no.-05, P.S.-Kashipur, District-Samastipur. 4.

Rajeev Kumar Tiwari Son of Ravindra Prasad Tiwari Resident of Ward no.- 05, West of Tirhut Academy, P.S.-Kashipur, District-Samastipur. 5.

Prakash Kumar Son of Kamal Dev Pandey Resident of Village-Dadhiya Asadhar, P.S.-Angarghat, District-Samastipur. 6.

Umashankar Mishra Son of Late Mahesh Prasad Mishra Resident of Mohalla-Ward no.17, Ram Babu Chowk, P.S.-Samastipur, DistrictSamastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, District-Samastipur. 2.

The Circle Officer, Samastipur, District-Samastipur. 3.

The Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Samastipur, DistrictSamastipur. 4.

The SHO, Town Police Station, District-Samastipur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Advocate General ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 27-09-2024 The petitioner has an alternate remedy to proceed under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956. There cannot be maintained a Public Interest Litigation on the subject matter nor is the invocation of the extraordinary power possible; when there is such an alternate efficacious remedy available.

Patna High Court CWJC No.14307 of 2024(2) dt.27-09-2024 2/2

2. Further the alleged encroachers are not made a party to the writ petition.

3. Present petition stands dismissed with the liberty aforesaid; without any observation on merits, or even the locus standi of the petitioner, which has to be decided by the Appropriate Authority under the Act of 1956; if a proper application is moved with the necessary parties arrayed. (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) ( Partha Sarthy, J) Saurabh/- U