IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2929 of 2011 1. Yogendra Manjhi, son of late Chaturi Manjhi 2. Neelmohan Manjhi, son of late Vishwanath Manjhi. 3. Prashuram Manjhi, son of Shreedhar Manjhi. 4. Mauleshwar Manjhi, son of Ayodhya Manjhi. 5. Karu Manjhi, son of late Kuldip Manjhi. 6. Rakesh Kumar Rajak, son of Shree Ganesh Rajak 7. Shashi Rajak, son of late Bhadya Rajak. 8. Chandra Shekhar Rajak, son of late Hari Rajak, all residents of Village Ballikitta, P.O. Kaushalpur, P.S. Amarpur, District- Banka ----- Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Collector, Banka. 2. District Magistrate, Banka 3. Anchal Adhikari, Amarpur Anchal, P.S. Amarpur, District-Banka. 4. Nandlal Manjhi, son of Gudri Manjhi, resident of Village Ballikitta, P.S. Amarpur, District-Banka ----- Respondents. --------------- 4. 29.3.2011 Heard Mr. Ganpati Trivedi for the petitioners, and Mr. Parth Sarthi, learned Standing Counsel No.10, for the respondents. The residents of the Village of Ballikitta, P.O. Kaushalpur, P.S. Amarpur, District- Banka, have preferred this writ petition in the nature of a public interest litigation praying therein that encroachment of the sub-canal in village Ballikitta by respondent no.4 may be directed to be removed in a situation where the proceedings have already been initiated and respondent no.3 has found such an encroachment at the instance of respondent no.4. 2. We have perused the materials on record and 2 considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. In view of the nature of issues raised in this writ petition, it appears to us that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this writ petition pending and calling for counter affidavits. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present case is covered by the provisions of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to be as „the Act‟). Section 2 of the Act is headed “definitions”, and sub-section (1) defines the “Collector” which reads as follows:- “2. Definitions.- In this Act unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context.- (1) “Collector” means the Collector of the district and includes any officer empowered by the State Government to discharge all or any of the functions of a Collector under this Act; Xxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxx” The definition enables the State Government to notify any Officer other than the Collector of the district to be empowered to discharge all or any of the functions of a Collector under this Act. In exercise of prerogative writ jurisdiction, we exercise our discretion under sub-section (i) of the Act directing the petitioners to present a copy of the writ petition along with the present order before the 3 concerned Sub Divisional Officer for the needful. 4. This writ petition is accordingly disposed. This Court will be pleased if the entire process in accordance with law is completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of submission of a copy of the present writ petition and the order. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar,J. ) ( S. P. Singh, J.)