✦ High Court of India

Patna High Court

Case Details

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23406 of 2012 ====================================================== Dharmdeo Bhar S/O Late Nathuni Bhar Resident Of Village - Newari Bisunpura, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through The Collector Cum District Magistrate, Siwan, District - Siwan 2. The Sub-Divisional Officer at Siwan 3. The Fisheries Officer cum Chief Executive Officer, Siwan, Distt. - Siwan 4. The Circle Officer Raghunathpur, Anchal - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 5. The Circle Inspector, P.S. + Anchal Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 6. The Halka Karmachari, Anchal Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 7. The Officer In Charge, P.S. Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 8. Sipahi Sah S/O Late Bathani Sah Resident Of Village - Newari Bisunpura, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan

Legal Reasoning

9. Sriniwash Sah S/O Sipahi Sah Resident Of Village - Newari Bisunpura, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 10. Jitar Sah S/O Sipahi Sah Resident Of Village - Newari Bisunpura, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 11. Collector Sah S/O Sipahi Sah Resident Of Village - Newari Bisunpura, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 12. Majistor Sah S/O Sipahi Sah Resident Of Village - Newari Bisunpura, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan 13. Saheb Sah S/O Sipahi Sah Resident Of Village - Newari Bisunpura, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan ====================================================== .... .... Respondent/s Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vitesh Kr. Singh For the Resp. No. 8 : Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh No.1 Ms. Kumari Rashmi For the State : Mr. Vijay Bharti, AC to SC 26 2 Patna High Court CWJC No.23406 of 2012 (7) dt.08-08-2013 2 / 4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA ORAL ORDER 7 08-08-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsels for the State and for respondent no. 8. The writ application has been filed for a direction upon the respondents to execute the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Siwan Sadar under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in case No. M-440 of 2006 which was filed by the petitioner. In the said proceedings which was filed by the petitioner the stand of the petitioner was that the land in question was entered in the Khatian as Gairmajarua Garha under the Fisheries Department but the respondent nos. 8 to 13 have encroached over the same. The stand taken was accepted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Siwan by his order dated 15.2.2008 with a direction to the Circle Officer, Raghunathpur and the Officer Incharge of Raghunathpur Police Station to get the land vacated from the second party respondent no.8. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 8, on the other hand, has taken the stand that the order dated 15.2.2008 has been passed behind his back and as a matter of fact no notice was ever served upon him and there was no occasion to appear in the matter. It is also submitted that prior to the said order, it is evident from the material on the record that the District Magistrate, Siwan had made a spot inspection on 1.2.2008 and passed order holding that a large number of villagers being 3 Patna High Court CWJC No.23406 of 2012 (7) dt.08-08-2013 3 / 4 settled on the ‘bhinda’ of the Pokhra, have made their houses of mud and a few pucca houses have also been constructed and the nature of the land has changed and the best solution to the problem would be to settle the land with such persons by adopting the legal procedure. The order of the Collector also reflects that the respondent no. 8 had constructed a wall outside his house which it was agreed that he would remove. It is also the stand of the respondent that ultimately by a recent resolution dated 24.4.2012 the Aam Sabha of the Gram Panchayat had adopted the resolution that settlement should be made in favour of the respondent no. 8 who is a landless person. It is the further contention of learned counsel for the respondent no. 8 that steps have been taken in the matter and are at an advanced stage. Learned counsel for the respondent No.8 further submits that the order dated 15.2.2008 passed by the Sub- Divisional Magistrate was passed behind his back and he was not even aware of such order before receiving notices of writ petition and he shall be taking appropriate steps for getting the said order set aside in appropriate proceedings. The stand of the respondent no. 8 is practically supported by the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 6 of the State which includes the Sub- Divisional Officer, Siwan. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the dispute in question is of wider ramification than has been sought to be made out by the petitioner and it does appear that the order dated 15.2.2008 of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate has been passed without taking into account the fact 4 Patna High Court CWJC No.23406 of 2012 (7) dt.08-08-2013 4 / 4 that the District Magistrate, Siwan himself was looking into the matter and had directed certain steps to be taken for settlement even prior to the passing of the said order. The notices may not have been properly served upon the respondent No. 8 otherwise he would have definitely stated the said facts which are practically contrary to the proceedings under Section 133 Cr.P.C. before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Siwan. Be that as it may, in view of the aforesaid facts, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the present matter and issue any direction. Let the matter be sorted out by the parties by taking recourse to appropriate proceedings whether by settlement or setting aside of the order dated 15.2.2008 under Section 133 Cr.P.C. by the respondent no.8. This Court also finds sufficient force in the stand of the respondents that the petitioner has suppressed material facts

Decision

in the writ petition and has not approached this Court with clean hands. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. S.Pandey/- (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J)

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments