Patna High Court MJC No.2387 of 2011 (5) dt.19-10-2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2387 of 2011 ====================================================== Surendra Kumar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Bihar & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kr Uapdhyay Sc20 ====================================================== 5 19-10-2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State as also for opposite party No.9 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the area of his house property as ascertained by the D.C.L.R. in the order dated 13.5.2011 not amenable to demolition has nonetheless been noticed to the petitioner on 24.5.2011 for purposes of demolition. Learned counsel for the opposite parties point out from the notice dated 24.5.2011 that it does not purport to demolish the petitioner’s house or boundary wall but the encroachment adjacent threreto to the extent of 7.42 decimals. No further enquiry with regard to the encroachment is possible in the contempt proceedings. Needless to observe that this 7.42 decimals cannot be related to the entries made in the Khatiyan, the river, pond, drain and pine found to be in accordance with the Chak manual or that there was no difference in the boundaries prior to consolidation and thereafter as ruled by the order dated 13.5.2011. Patna High Court MJC No.2387 of 2011 (5) dt.19-10-2011 It has been brought to the attention of the Court that both sides have preferred appeals to the extent aggrieved by the order dated 13.5.2011. The final culminations of the controversy has therefore to be reached in the pending appeals. Any further relief/interim relief naturally has to be sought by the parties before the appellate court itself. The contempt proceedings stand disposed. Krishna Chandra Jha/- (Navin Sinha, J)