IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE NO.2682 OF 2009 KEDAR NATH SAH, SON OF LATE RAMDHARI SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE, POST OFFICE AND POLICE STATION PIPRAHI, DISTRICT SHEOHAR VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COLLLECTOR, SHEOHAR 2. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND REFORMS, SHEOHAR 3. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, PIPRAHI, DISTRICT SHEOHAR 4. THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, PIPRAHI, DISTRICT SHEOHAR ********* 5 25/10/2011 An intervention application has been filed on behalf of one Nagendra Kumar Kushwaha who claims that the petitioner has encroached the lands appertaining to plot no. 2611 and that the intervenor has valid title of the lands in question. I.A. No. 10624 of 2010 is allowed as the intervenor was a party in the earlier encroachment proceedings. The dispute arose in the year 1990 when the proceedings under the Public Land Encroachment Act were initiated with respect to the lands of plot no. 2611. In the land encroachment proceeding, the intervenor Nagendra Kumar Kushwaha appeared and contested the proceeding. The first order of the Deputy Collector Land Reforms was against the petitioner. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Collector, which was disposed of on 15.06.2004, remitting the matter back to the Deputy Collector Land Reforms. The Deputy Collector 2 Land Reforms, Sheohar vide order dated 02.08.2006 held that the petitioner had made certain encroachments. The petitioner again went in appeal before the Collector, Sheohar, who disposed of the mater vide order dated 03.03.2008 directing the Deputy Collector Land Reforms to pass a fresh order after a detailed enquiry and taking into account the documents relating to the land acquisition proceeding initiated years back with respect to plot no. 2611. An encroachment miscellaneous case was initiated and finally by Annexure-2, the Deputy Collector Land Reforms held that the intervenor through his mother had appeared in the land acquisition proceeding. The compensation was paid to the intervenor with respect to 2.5 decimals of land of plot no. 2611. It was also held that as far as the petitioner is concerned, he was never noticed in the land acquisition proceeding and as such his lands which also appertain to plot no. 2611 were never acquired by the State Government. There is also a finding of the Deputy Collector Land Reforms that although the intervenor had purchased 2.5 decimals of land, he had taken the compensation for 3 decimals of land, which is in contravention of the law and against the documents of title of the intervenor. Therefore, the conclusion reached by the Deputy Collector Land 3 Reforms is that the intervenor had encroached upon the lands under acquisition inasmuch as the intervenor had title with respect to 2.5 decimals of land only. The case of the intervenor is that the total land of plot no. 2611 is 5 decimals. It is said that the land belongs to Dev Raj Mahto, who had sold the land to one Janak Mahto on 18.07.1963. Janak Mahto also sold the lands in question 06.03.1976 to one Ram Bilash Mahto. Later, there was a partition in the family and the lands of plot no. 2628 being 8 decimals and plot no. 2611 measuring 5 decimals, total lands being 13 decimals were divided equally between the two brothers. Bhikhari Mahto obtained 6.5 decimals of land and Ram Autar Matho, similarly, obtained 6.5 decimals of land. The intervenor’s mother purchased lands appertaining to plot no. 2611 whereas the petitioner also purchased the lands appertaining to plot no. 2611 along with other lands from the land holders aforesaid. On the basis of the aforesaid facts and the records of the land acquisition proceeding, it would appear that the order of the Deputy Collector Land Reforms in the encroachment proceeding attained finality as no appeal was filed by the intervenor against the said order. The petitioner is aggrieved by the notice dated 4 30.12.2008 by which he has been asked to remove the encroachment over part of plot no. 2611 and the letter no. 26 dated 19.02.2009 by which the Circle Officer had requested the Officer-in-charge, Piprahi Police Station to deploy police force for removal of alleged encroachment by the petitioner over plot no. 2611. The submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the land encroachment proceeding has already attained finality and concluded with respect to the said plot of lands and as such, the issuance of second notice in contemplation of land encroachment proceeding is barred and would amount to harassment and misuse of the process of law. This Court, on considering the rival contentions of the petitioner as well as the intervenor and after perusing the order of the Deputy Collector Land Reforms discussed above as contained in Annexure-2, concludes that since the land acquisition proceeding is concluded and it has already been held by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms that the land of the petitioner was not acquired at any stage, it cannot be said that the petitioner is the encroacher on plot no. 2611 with respect to the area which he has purchased through a registered sale deed in the year 1986. I accordingly quash Annexure-2, the notice 5 issued by the Circle Officer, Piprahi dated 30.12.2008, Piprahi and Annexure-5, the letter of the Circle Officer for deployment of police force for removing the encroachment. In the result, this writ application is allowed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)