The Patna High Court dismissed a writ petition filed as PIL regarding encroachment on public land. The Court held the issue was private in nature and the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 was the appropriate remedy, rendering the writ frivolous.
Petition dismissed with costs of Rs. 10,000 payable to the State Legal Services Authority.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16543 of 2023
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.K. Shahi, A.G. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY)
Date : 02-12-2023
Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred
Patna High Court CWJC No.16543 of 2023 dt.02-12-2023 2/4
for the issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders and direction/directions for commanding and directing the authorities to remove the encroachment on the way/public road of Area about 9.68 decimals of petitioners and entire villagers from illegal and forceful encroachment of respondent nos. 6 to 7 who have not removed their encroachment the same in spite of the several orders, notices and directions of different dates of concerned authorities to private respondent nos. 6 to 7 and further ordered to remove encroachment of original public road/public land of the petitioners and villagers.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submit that the land in question situated in Mauza-Balhampur, Thana No. 75, Khata No. 203, Khesra No.- 1181 (area-9.68 decimals), within the Circle- Simri Bakhtiyarpur, Saharsa has been recorded as ‘Gairmajaruwa Aam Bihar Sarkar’ as a public land which has been encroached by the respondent nos. 6 and 7.
4. In this regard, they submitted application before the respondent no. 5, the Circle Officer, Simri Bakhtiyarpur, Saharsa in the year 2016 which failed to elicit any response.
5. Later, in 2018 another application was preferred before the respondent no. 4, the Sub-Divisional Public
Patna High Court CWJC No.16543 of 2023 dt.02-12-2023 3/4
Complaint Redressal Officer, Simri Bakhtiyarpur, Saharsa but again without any success.
6. However, later the respondent no. 5 submitted a report accepting that the respondent nos. 6 and 7 are encroachers and further vide his office letter no. 200 dated 30.01.2019 informed the respondent no. 4 that the encroachment stands removed.
7. The case of the petitioners is/are that the encroachment still remains which forced them to file present P.I.L.
8. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, has taken this Court to the prayer portion in paragraph 1 as also paragraph 7 to show that it is a private interest of the petitioners which they have given the colour of Public Interest Litigation.
9. It is his submission that if the petitioners have any grievance, they can very will prefer a proper petition under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 (henceforth for short ‘the Act’) before the appropriate authority. Instead, the present P.I.L.
10. We accept the submissions put forward by learned State Counsel. In our considered view, when there is an Act to take care of such grievance, filing of writ petition
Patna High Court CWJC No.16543 of 2023 dt.02-12-2023 4/4
more so the Public Interest Litigation is unwarranted when it is out and out their private interest.
11. It is for the petitioners to decide whether to approach the concerned authority with proper petition or not. So far as the present petition is concerned, it is frivolous, devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed with a cost of Rs. 10,000/to be paid to the Bihar State Legal Services Authority. If the same is not paid within a period of one month, the Bihar State Legal Services Authority would be entitled to recover it from the petitioners as arrear due on land under the appropriate enactment.
12. It is made clear that we have not touched upon the merit of the case and if any such petition is filed by the petitioners, the same has to be decided on its own merit after hearing the concerned parties.
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)
(Rajiv Roy, J)
| Neha/- | |
|---|---|
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
| CAV DATE | N/A |
| Uploading Date | 06.12.2023 |
| Transmission Date |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition is maintainable when the grievance concerns private encroachment of public land and a specific Act is available.
Whether raising a private land encroachment dispute as a Public Interest Litigation is warranted when a dedicated statute exists.
Subhash Kumar Singh and others
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department
District Magistrate, Saharsa
Ram Swarup Sada
Yogendra Sada
K. Vinod Chandran
Rajiv Roy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
