Disposed

Surendra Thakur v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Feb 2022CWJC/1440/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging an encroachment removal notice. The Court directed the Appellate Authority to decide the pending appeal expeditiously and held that no demolition of petitioner structures could occur pending that decision.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Appellate Authority to dispose appeal within three months; stay on demolition of petitioners' structures pending appeal disposal.

Surendra Thakur Vs The State of Bihar — Land Acquisition | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1440 of 2022

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Surendra Thakur Son of Late Manan Thakur Resident of Vilalge-Gaura Dhusaha, P.S.-Manjhi, District-saran at Chapra.

¶4

Ramlakhi Thakur Son of Late Indrasen Thakur, Resident of Vilalge-Gaura Dhusaha, P.S.-Manjhi, District-Saran at Chapra.

¶5

Brahmanand Thakur @ Brhamanand Singh Son of Late Indrasen Thakur Resident of Vilalge-Gaura Dhusaha, P.S.-Manjhi, District-Saran at Chapra.

¶6

Vijay Thakur @ Vijay Singh Son of Late Indrasen Thakur Resident of Vilalge-Gaura Dhusaha, P.S.-Manjhi, District-Saran at Chapra.

¶7

... ... Petitioner/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Home Development, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶10

The Principal Secreary, Revenue and Land Rerorm Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶11

The District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra.

¶12

The Sub-Divisional Oficer, Sadar Chapara, Saran.

¶13

The Circle Officer, Manjhi, Saran.

¶14

Vijay Kumar Thakur Son of Lalan Thakur, Resident Village-Gaura Dhusahan, P.S.-Manjhi, District-Saran.

¶15

Hari Shankar Singh Son of Kuldip Narayan Singh Resident Village-Gaura Dhusahan, P.S.-Manjhi, District-Saran.

¶16

... ... Respondent/s

¶17

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ansul, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Raj Kishore Roy, GP-18 ======================================================

¶18

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶19

2 01-02-2022 Heard Mr. Ansul, learned counsel for the petitioners

¶20

and Mr. Raj Kishore Roy,, learned G.P. 18 for the State through video conferencing.

¶21

The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 24.12.2021 (Annexure-9) passed by Circle Officer, Manjhi (Saran) as well as the final notice dated 14.1.2022 under Section

¶22

Patna High Court CWJC No.1440 of 2022(2) dt.01-02-2022 2/3

¶23

6(2) of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 (Annexure-10) whereby the Circle Officer, Manjhi (Saran) has directed for removal of encroachment from the land situated at Khata No. 149, Plot No. 1035 having an area of 7 Katthas 16 Dhurs having Thana No. 46 at Mauza Gaura Dhushan, P.S. Manjhi in the District of Saran.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are having possessory rights on the land in question through their ancestor which would be evident from Cadestral Survey Khatiyan annexed as Annexure-1 to this writ application. Learned counsel further submits that the Circle Officer, Manjhi (Saran) while passing the impugned order of removal of encroachment, did not consider the material and relevant evidence adduced by the petitioners during course of the proceeding. However, the petitioners have preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority under Section 11 of the Public Land Encroachment Act on 13.01.2022 which is still pending. He next submits that the Respondent Authorities with the help of Police personnel had come at the site for demolition of the Godown and boundary wall of the petitioners situated upon the subject land during pendency of the appeal filed by the petitioners.

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.1440 of 2022(2) dt.01-02-2022 3/3

¶26

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that since the petitioners have filed Encroachment Appeal which is pending, the present writ application may be disposed of with a direction to the Appellate Authority to dispose the appeal within a reasonable period.

¶27

In view of the submissions made by the parties, the Appellate Authority i.e. the District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra (Respondent No. 3) is directed to dispose the Encroachment Appeal filed by the petitioners on its own merit and in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶28

With aforesaid observation and direction, this writ application stands disposed of.

¶29

It is made clear that till disposal of the appeal by the Appellate Authority, there shall be no demolition of the structure of the petitioners situated upon the subject land.

¶30

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

¶31

S.Ali/-

¶32

U T

Surendra Thakur v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Thakur v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahesh Gond Vs the State of Bihar

Banke Singh @ Banke Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Lal Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Dhiraj Kamkar Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Vishal Kumar Vs the State of Bihar