IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3966 of 2006 1. Sheo Muni Singh son of late Ram Suresh Singh, 2. Kameshwar Singh son of late Rang Bahadur Singh, both resident of village Bandipur, P.S. Ramgarh, district Kaimur …. Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna 3. The District Collector, Kaimur 4. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mohania, district Kaimur 5. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Mohania, district Kaimur 6. The Circle Officer, Ramgarh, district Kaimur 7. The Block Development Officer, Ramgarh, district Kaimur 8. Gram Bharti Mahavidyalaya, Ramgarh, Kaimur …. Respondents with CWJC No.11586 of 2009 1. Nagina Sah 2. Pyarelal Gupta @ Ram Pare Sah 3. Dular Chand Gupta, 4. Gulab Chand Prasad, sons of late Jamuna Sah, All resident of village Bandipur, Police Station- Ramgarh, district Kaimur at Bhabhua ….. …. Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna 3. The District Collector, Kaimur at Bhabhua 4. Sub-Divisional Officer, Mohania, district Kaimur 5. Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Mohania, district- Kaimur 6. The Circle Officer, Ramgarh, district- Kaimur 7. Block Development Officer, Ramgarh, district –Kaimur 8. Gram Bharti Mahavidyalaya, Ramgarh, through its Principal, Police Station Ramgarh, district Kaimur ………. Respondents ----------- For the Petitioners :( in both writ petitions)M/s Bimal Kumar & Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Advocates For the Respondent No.8 (In C.W.J.C. No. 3966 of 2006):M/s V. Nath & Radha Mohan Pandey, Advocates For the State :Mr. Anil Kumar Verma, A.C. to AAG-13 03/ 01.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, State and Respondent no.8, Gram Bharti Mahavidyalaya. 2 2. Petitioners in C.W.J.C. 3966 of 2006 are the descendants of Sheo Murat Singh and Ram Prasad Singh, who executed deed of gift and agreement dated 23.9.1971 in favour of the college Respondent no.8 whereunder 1.50 and 7.74 acres of land in plot nos. 93, 97 and 205 was gifted to the college Respondent no.8. Ram Prasad Singh, another ancestor of the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 3966 of 2006 also joined the execution of agreement dated 23.9.1971. Later, dispute arose about the area of land transferred in favour of the college and Title Suit nos. 155 of 1992 and 73 of 1997 were filed by these petitioners questioning the validity of the deed of gift and the deed of agreement. During the pendency of the suits, a house and dalan were raised over portion of plot no. 97 measuring 8.25 and 2.25 decimals of land. Still, later a proceeding was initiated for removal of the encroachment from the aforesaid land of the college measuring 8.25 and 2.25 decimals, which was the subject matter of the deed of gift and the agreement dated 23.9.1971. In the encroachment proceeding, order dated 15.12.2003, Annexure-3 in C.W.J.C. No. 3966 of 2006 has been passed directing the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 3966 of 2006 as also the 3 purchasers, petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 11586 of 2009 to remove the encroachment. Aforesaid order has also been affirmed in appeal, vide order dated 10.2.2006, Annexure- 5 in C.W.J.C. No. 3966 of 2006 and order dated 12.6.2009, Annexure-7 in C.W.J.C. No. 11586 of 2009. 3. By filing the two writ petitions, the order directing removal of encroachment has been challenged before this Court. The college has filed counter affidavit in both the writ petitions and supported the order, with reference to the contents of the gift, agreement dated 23.9.1971, which is contained in Annexures-P and Q to the counter affidavit. 4. From perusal of the contents of the deed of gift, agreement, it is quite evident that 1.50 acres of land in pot no. 93, 30 decimals of land in plot no. 205 and 7.74 acres of land in plot no. 97 is the subject matter of the deed of gift, agreement dated 23.9.1971. On bare perusal of the contents of the deed of gift and the agreement, I was impressed with the case of the college, but no sooner it came to my notice that house and Dalan has been raised by these petitioners over portion of the land measuring 8.25 and 2.25 decimals, which has been gifted to the college 4 Respondent no.8 under gift, agreement dated 23.9.1971 may be with the tacit consent of the college Respondent no.8 , I thought it appropriate to modify the order directing removal of the encroachment to the extent that the construction made by the petitioners over 8.25 and 2.25 decimals of land of plot no. 97 be not demolished during the pendency of the aforesaid suits, the petitioners are, however, directed not to obstruct the entry of the college through its main gate. 5. Before parting with this order, this Court would like to observe that hearing of the suits be expedited and the same be disposed of as early as possible in any case within six months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. 6. Both the writ petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)