IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5723 of 2004 S.N.MISHRA @ SACHIDA NAND MISHRA @ Sachida Mishra Son of Shri Chandra Mohan Mishra, resident of village & P.O. Khajuri, P.S. Simri Bakhtiarpur, Dist. Saharsa ….Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. TheCollector Saharsa, District Saharsa. 3. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Saharsa, District Saharsa. 4. The Sub- Divisional Officer, Simari Bakhtiarpur, District Saharsa. 5. The District Board, Saharsa, District Saharsa, through it’s Chairman. 6. The Chairman District Board Saharsa, Distrist Saharsa. 7. Hem Chandra Mishra @ Hem Narain Mishra son of late Krishnadeo Mishra 8. Amrendra Mishra, son of late haldhar Mishra. 9. Rajendra Mishra son of late laxmikant Mishra. 10. Yogendra Mishra, son of late Anup Mishra All 7 to 10 resident of villaged & P.O. Khajuri, P.S. Simari Khatiarpur, District Saharsa. 11. The Gram panchayat Raj, Khajuri, P.S. Simari Bakhtiarpur, District Saharsa. ………..Respondents. ----------- Advocate for petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kr. Jha, Advocate. Mr. Chy. Prem Kumar Thakur, Advocate. For the State: Mr. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad, A.C. to S.C-III Advocate for Respondents: Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. P.C.Dev, Advocate. Advocate for Respondent Nos. 7 to 9: Mr. Prafull Chandra Thakur, Advocate. 3 29.03.2011 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition raising a grievance that a plot of land bearing C.S. Plot no. 1787 corresponding to R.S.P. No. 2560 appertaining to Khata No. 184 situate at village Khajuri, P.S. Simari Bakhtiarpur, District Saharsa, though has been recorded in the revisioinal survey Khatiyan as Government land as ‘Sarkar Bahadur Keshar Hind’ and nature of the land has been recorded as Road, yet some part of it is being settled in favour of respondent nos. 7 to 10 by respondent Zila Parishad Saharsa on yearly basis. The receipts showing the settlement of the land in question in favour of 2 respondent No.7 for the year 1994-95 to the year 2002-2003 have been brought on record as Annexure-1 series. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the nature of the lands in question has been recorded as road and it belongs to the State Government, it should not have been settled in favour of private individuals including respondent nos 7 to 10 . Further grievance of the petitioner is that by making such settlement of the land in question in favour of private respondents, the right of easement of the petitioner from his land to the main road has been adversely affected. 4. Learned counsel for the State as also private respondent Nos. 7 to 10 submit that settlements are being made on yearly basis and the private respondents are still in occupation over the land in question. It is further contended on behalf of the private respondents that even by settlement of the aforesaid land, the public road has not been obstructed and only a small portion of the land has been settled in favour of private respondents. 5. After hearing the parties and on consideration of the materials available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that issues raised on behalf of the parties are based on disputed question of facts and, therefore, all the issues are required to be considered by a competent authority afresh. 6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner is hereby directed to file a detailed representation 3 before respondentno.3 within a period of four weeks from today raising his entire grievances regarding the aforesaid settlement of the lands in favour of the private respondent nos. 7 to 10. He is also given liberty to raise an issue before the Zila Parishad Saharsa that it has no jurisdiction/authority to pass such an order for settlement of the land in question, as the same has been recorded as a public road in the Revisional Survey record. 7. If the petitioner appears before the respondent no.3 with a detailed representation and a copy of this order within the time prescribed by this Court, then the respondent no.3 shall be obliged to consider the same in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the respondent nos. 7 to 10. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 7 to 10 undertakes that they shall also appear before respondent no.3 within the aforesaid period of four weeks. Respondent no.3 shall look into the grievances raised on behalf of the petitioner and after taking into consideration the pleas raised on behalf of respondent nos. 7 to 10, shall be obliged to dispose of the same by a speaking order. The entire exercise must be completed by the respondent no.3 within a period of three months from the date of filing of such representation. 8. It is made clear that if the petitioner does not appear before the respondent no.3 within the stipulated time with detailed representation and a copy of this order, then it shall be 4 construed that the writ petition stood finally rejected by this Court . 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ application stands disposed of. Rahman/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)