In a PIL regarding public land encroachment, the High Court held the petition misconceived as statutory remedies under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 were available, and no public interest for a marginalized section was shown.
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.4024 of 2023
======================================================
Anil Kumar Mishra, Son of Late Shivdeep Mishra, Resident of VillageDurgadih, P.S.- Bikramganj, District- Rohtas (Sasaram).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, SC-25 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD)
Date : 19-04-2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The writ application has been filed as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking direction for removal of encroachments over alleged public lands.
3. The petitioner has disclosed the details of the land, which is irrelevant having regard to the nature of order that we propose to pass in the instant proceedings.
4. The Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) provides remedy for
Patna High Court CWJC No.4024 of 2023 dt.19-04-2023 2/3
removal of encroachment from public lands. Section 4 of the Act allows an opportunity to the noticee (petitioner) to raise any defense which they could have raised if they were defendants in a properly framed suit for removal of encroachment. The Act also provides an opportunity of hearing under Section 5; as well as the consequences of non-appearance in the proceedings.
5. It is only after observing the above procedure that final order is to be passed by the Collector under Section 6 of the Act, either dropping the proceedings or passing orders for ensuring removal of encroachment, damages or otherwise. The order of the Collector for removing encroachment is also subject to appeal under Section 11 of the Act. Section 13 of the Act also provides an opportunity of review in case of any mistake or error in the course of any proceedings.
6. The issue raised by the petitioner is essentially an issue falling within the scope and ambit of the Act. The writ petition, by way of a PIL, therefore, in the opinion of the Court, is misconceived. If the instant case were to be entertained as a PIL, then all issues of encroachment would be required to be dealt with by this Court as a PIL.
7. We find that no public interest concerning any marginalised/oppressed, or inarticulate section of society has
Patna High Court CWJC No.4024 of 2023 dt.19-04-2023 3/3
been espoused in the instant writ proceedings, so as to allow the petitioner to bypass the statutory remedy whereby and whereunder the alleged encroachers of the public lands would be dealt with in a fair procedure, and leave it open for the petitioner to pursue remedy in accordance with law.
8. The writ petition is dismissed.
(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)
( Madhuresh Prasad, J)
shashank/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| Uploading Date | 21.04.2023 |
| Transmission Date | NA |
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a PIL can bypass the statutory remedy provided under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 regarding removal of encroachments.
Whether the petitioner has espoused a cause in public interest concerning a marginalised section of society justifying judicial intervention.
Whether the writ petition in a matter of public land encroachment is misconceived when statutory procedures exist.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
N/AReferred
5 provisions across 1 enactments
Anil Kumar Mishra
State of Bihar through Chief Secretary
District Magistrate, Rohtas
Sub Divisional Officer, Bikramganj
Block Development Officer, Bikramganj
Circle Officer, Bikramganj
K. Vinod Chandran
Madhuresh Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
