IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5672 of 2010 1. MD. HASNAIN S/O LATE MD. YASIN R/O VILL.- RASULPUR, P.O. & P.S.- FATUHA, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PATNA, BIHAR 3. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, PATNA CITY 4. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, FATUHA ----------- 3/ 28/03/2011 An application for intervention vide I.A. No.5841/10 is stated to have been filed on behalf of Mr. Sheikh Abdul Hasib by learned Counsel Shri Mukesh Kumar on 8.7.2010. The same is allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a drainage dispute between him and the intervener. The latter has filed Title Suit No.242/08. The impugned Land Encroachment Case No.2/09-10 has not been initiated by the State for any alleged encroachment of public lands, but has been engineered by the intervener. There has been no final adjudication in the land encroachment proceeding and on his application a final order has been passed straightway. Learned counsel for the State from the counter affidavit submits that the lands in question are public lands and the petitioner is found to have encroached to the extent of 19 ft. 10 inches. The duty to provide proper water drainage is of the authorities concerned whether it be the 2 Panchayat or the Municipality. If there is a drainage dispute between the petitioner and the intervener, Section-147 Cr.P.C. has adequate provisions to deal with the same. If the intervener has chosen to approach the Civil Court, it is now for the competent Civil Court to pass adjudicatory orders. Any proceedings for encroachment upon public lands has to be initiated by the State against the alleged encroacher under the Bihar Public Lands Encroachment Act. The application may be made by a third person but the lis shall lie between the State and the encroacher. From the notice given to the petitioner in Encroachment Case No.2/09- 10, the Court finds substance in the submission on behalf of the petitioner that it was initiated not on the satisfaction of the authorities but at the behest of the intervener as the contesting parties are the intervener and the petitioner. The State figures nowhere. The petitioner has specifically stated in paragraph-8 that there has been no adjudication in the land encroachment proceeding with due opportunity to defend whereafter final orders may have been passed. The counter affidavit is silent on paragraph-8. The order dated 23.3.2010 purported to be in Land Encroachment Case No.2/09-10 is set aside. This shall be without prejudice to the rights of 3 the State, if so advised, to proceed afresh in accordance with law. The application stands allowed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)