Disposed

Shakya Muni College,Bodh Gaya v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC25 Jun 2013CWJC/453/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition challenging a notice under the Public Land Encroachment Act. Instead of deciding the matter at the notice stage, the court directed the petitioner to approach the Circle Officer for adjudication after filing a detailed petition to prove the land's nature and bona fide possession.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to appear before the Circle Officer within eight weeks with a detailed petition and show cause; coercive action was restrained pending adjudication.

Shakya Muni College,Bodh Gaya Vs the State of Bihar and Ors. — Property and Title | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.453 of 2009 ======================================================
Shakya Muni College,Bodh Gaya through its Principal Dr Arvind Kumar Tiwari, Son of Prof. Jagda Nand Brahmachari, resident of South of Central Jail, Gaya .... .... Petitioner/s Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Collector, Gaya
3. The Anchal Adhikari, Bodh Gaya, District Gaya 4. The Mahanth, Bodh Gaya Math, Bodh Gaya, Gaya- .... .... Respondent/s ======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr K. N. Chaubey, Sr. Advocate Mr. Ambuj Nayan Chaubey Mrs Ritu Priyadarshini Mr. Siddharth Harsh
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kundan Bahadur Singh, SC 22 Mr Neeraj Kumar, AC to SC 22
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL ORDER

¶2

11 25-06-2013 This Court is reluctant to come to the rescue of the petitioner at the very threshold at the issuance of the notice by the Circle Officer, Bodh Gaya under Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956. Petitioner has tried to prevail upon the Court that the action initiated by the Circle Officer is beyond his jurisdiction and competence. The notice suffers from the vice of lack of jurisdiction or excessive jurisdiction sought to be exercised by the Circle Officer in the background that the petitioner is said to have come in possession of the land in question on the basis of a settlement made by the erstwhile Mahanth of Gaya in the year

¶3

Patna High Court CWJC No.453 of 2009 (11) dt.25-06-2013

¶4

2/4

¶5

It is his assertion that the lands in question were never part of the ceiling proceedings, in fact, they were rather exempted from the ceiling proceedings and, therefore, the State can never be a claimant or have a right over these properties of the erstwhile Mahanth in any manner whatsoever.

¶6

It is also urged that a minority Institution for educational purpose has been set up and has been working for more than a decade or two. The institution was inaugurated by a high functionary which could be a proof and evidence of recognition to the institution and its working.

¶7

With due respect to the various submissions of the learned senior counsel, these are defence, which are being put up by him before this Court, which are questions of facts and not really of law. There is long history behind ceiling proceedings, which were initiated against the erstwhile Mahanth of Gaya and all kinds of mechanism have been used to defeat the ceiling proceedings, which would be evident from series of case, which came to be filed before this Court at one point of time or other.

¶8

This Court is not the custodian of all revenue records and assertions of facts would be required to be corroborated and cross-checked by the revenue authorities at the district level. There may not be an occasion to exercise discretion at this stage,

¶9

Patna High Court CWJC No.453 of 2009 (11) dt.25-06-2013

¶10

3/4

¶11

which is the stage of issuance of notice to the petitioner. The apprehension, which the petitioner has in mind, according to this Court, is misplaced. He can place all the materials, which he has in support thereof, to establish his bona fide and no authority much less the Circle Officer would like to proceed in a matter, which does not fall within his domain or power which he has exercised.

¶12

Even otherwise, this Court is circumspect in entertaining writ applications at the stage of notice itself especially where facts are the basis on which the legality of notice is required to be judged.

¶13

In view of the same, the Court comes to a considered opinion that it will be in the interest of the petitioner to file his detailed petition against the notice contained in Annexure- 4 dated 15.7.2008. The Circle Officer would be bound to hear the petitioner, take into consideration the materials, which will be placed by him, cross- verify those materials with the revenue records and if the assertion of the petitioner with regard to nature of the land and the manner of acquisition is found to be correct, there will be no occasion to proceed in the matter under Public Land Encroachment Act. It will be open to the petitioner also to establish before the Circle Officer that the land in question does not fall within the definition of a ‘public land’ which requires to

¶14

Patna High Court CWJC No.453 of 2009 (11) dt.25-06-2013

¶15

4/4

¶16

be cleared of encroachment as is the stand of the petitioner.

¶17

Let the petitioner appear before the Circle Officer within eight weeks with his show cause. The Circle Officer will hear the petitioner or all such authorities, who are required to be heard and pass order after adjudication, preferably within another three months thereof or such extended time if deliberations spillover for cogent reasons as such.

¶18

It goes without saying that till the basic issue is adjudicated upon by the Circle Officer, there may not be any occasion to take any coercive action since after all the institution has been in existence for awhile and there is no urgency to first act and then decide, which anyway would be an illegal act on behalf of the concerned authorities.

¶19

Writ stands disposed of with the above directions.

¶20

Shakya Muni College,Bodh Gaya v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakya Muni College,Bodh Gaya v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md.Alimuddin,Advocate Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Justice Someshwar Nath Pathak Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Fanindara Bhushan Chaudhary Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Siya Ram Sharan Sharma Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Md.Khurshid Alam Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Madhusudan Prasad Jhunjhunwala Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.