Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1881 of 2013 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18967 of 2010 ====================================================== Bal Krishna Jha S/O Late Baidyanath Jha Resident of Village Jafrapur, P.O. Babhani, P.S. Purnea Sadar, (Dagarua O.P.) District Purnea. Versus .... .... Petitioner/s 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Mr. Ashok Kumr Sinha, the Chief Secretary Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 3. Mr. Brajesh Mehrotra, the then Divisional Commissioner, Purnea Division, Purnea 4. Mr. Pankaj Kumar at present posted as Divisional Commissioner Purnea Division, Purnea. 5. Mr. N. Sharvanan Kumar, the then District Magistrate, Purnea at present posted as District Magistrate, Patna. 6. Mr. Manish Kumar Verma at present posted as District Magistrate, Purnea. 7. Md. Moeezuddin, Sub Divisional Officer, Baisi, District Purnea. 8. Mr. Arun Kumar Sinha, the Circle Officer, Dagarua Block, District Purnea. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shankar Kumar Thakur, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar Choubey, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 6 11-09-2013 Heard Mr. Shankar Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the
Legal Reasoning
petitioner and Mr. Rabindra Kumar Choubey, learned S.C.8 for the State. This contempt application arises from an order dated 16.11.2011 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 18967 of 2010 and order dated 7.11.2012 passed in M.J.C. No. 1993 of 2012. Facts of the matter in brief is that the writ application 2 Patna High Court MJC No.1881 of 2013 (6) dt.11-09-2013 2 / 5 bearing C.W.J.C. No. 18967 of 2010 was filed by the petitioner charging certain private respondents with encroachment on public land. This Court taking note of the grievance set out, disposed of the writ application with liberty to the petitioner to file a comprehensive application under the provisions of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) and which was to be disposed of in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing to all the contesting parties. Upon non compliance of the order passed in the writ application, the petitioner alleging contempt filed M.J.C. No. 1993 of 2012. On 7.11.2012 a show cause was filed on behalf of the opposite parties mentioning therein that the matter had been posted for hearing and whereafter a fresh order would be passed. Taking note of the show cause, the contempt application was disposed of on 7.11.2012. The petitioner on his part filed a comprehensive application, copy whereof is placed at Annexure 6 and pursuant whereto, notices were issued to the alleged encroachers on 27.11.2012. The respondent Circle Officer, Dagarua, Purnea discharging duties of a Collector under the Act, 3 Patna High Court MJC No.1881 of 2013 (6) dt.11-09-2013 3 / 5 passed an order dated 15.1.2013 after hearing the parties and while doing so, simply observed that no further order need be passed in view of his earlier order and that he did not have jurisdiction to modify his earlier order. The petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 15.1.2013 filed this contempt application charging the Circle Officer of willful and deliberate disobedience of the order passed in the writ application as well as in the contempt application bearing M.J.C. No. 1993 of 2012. This Court taking note of the circumstances issued notice to the Circle Officer Dagarua, requiring him to respond to the matter. Pursuant to the notice, Mr. Arun Kumar, Circle Officer, Dagarua District Purnea registered his appearance and gave an undertaking to correct the error that had occurred in the order dated 15.1.2013 and the matter was adjourned enabling him to carry out his undertaking. Today a supplementary show cause has been filed on behalf of the Circle Officer, Dagarua enclosing an order dated 30.8.2013 disposing of the encroachment proceedings initiated on the complaint made by the petitioner. I have heard Mr. Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Choubey, learned counsel for the opposite parties. It is the contention of Mr. Thakur while being critical of the order dated 30.8.2013 that the Circle Officer, Dagarua has 4 Patna High Court MJC No.1881 of 2013 (6) dt.11-09-2013 4 / 5 acted in excess of the jurisdiction vested in him under the provisions of the Act and that the order besides being blatantly illegal, contains incorrect particulars. It is the contention of learned counsel that the Circle Officer while discharging the duty of the Collector under the Act, has proceeded to exercise jurisdiction not vested in him. It is submitted that by the impugned order not only the encroachment case has been
Decision
disposed of rather the Circle Officer has also recommended for settlement of the alleged encroachers which again is in excess of the jurisdiction vested in a Collector under the Act. The arguments of Mr. Thakur has been contested by Mr. Choubey, to submit that in obedience with the directions passed by this Court in the earlier round of proceedings, the order has been passed, and if the petitioner is aggrieved by the same on whatever ground, there is a remedy available to him under the provisions of the Act. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the materials on record. There are claims and counter claims in support and in opposition of the impugned order and this Court exercising contempt jurisdiction would not endeavour to enter into the merit of the claims. The petitioner has a remedy which he can avail by 5 Patna High Court MJC No.1881 of 2013 (6) dt.11-09-2013 5 / 5 questioning the order passed by the Collector under the Act, before an appropriate forum by filing an appropriate application. Any observation by this Court on the merits of the order would cause prejudice to the case of the parties and thus this Court refraining from doing so disposes of this application affording liberty to the petitioner to question the order dated 30.8.2013 before an appropriate forum by filing an appropriate application. Mr. Thakur submits that he shall file an appeal under the provisions of the Act but also prays for direction for expeditious disposal of the same. It goes without saying that any such appeal filed on behalf of the appellant would be considered and disposed of by the Collector under the Act in accordance with law and after hearing all the contesting parties, expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The appearance of Mr. Arun Kumar, Circle Officer, Dagarua who is in attendance today also, stands dispensed with. Bibhash/- (Jyoti Saran, J)