IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.586 of 2009 1. SAMIR KUMAR PATHAK @ RANJAN PATHAK, S/O SHIVJEE PATHAK 2. SATYADEO PANDEY, SON OF LATE MAHAVIR PANDEY, BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- GOTHI, P.S. ANDAR, DISTRICT- SIWAN……………………. PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. MR. A.K. CHAUHAN, THE COMMISSIONER,SIWAN DIVISION 3. MR. RAJENDRA PRASAD, CIRCLE OFFICER-CUM- BDO,ANDAR, SIWAN 4. MR. PRABHAT KUMAR SINHA,S.D.O. SIWAN 5. AASH NARAIN SHARMA ANCHAL INSPECTOR,ANDAR, SIWAN 6. RAMA SHANKAR BAITHA, HEADMASTER,GOVT. PRIMARY SCHOOL,GOTHI, P.S. ANDAR, DISTT. SIWAN 7. SHEOJI YADAV, SON OF SHRI INDRASAN YADAV, EX- MUKHIA OF GRAM PANCHAYAT MIAN KE BHATKAN, P.S. ANDAR, DISTRICT- SIWAN, 8. SUSHRI VANDANA PRAYASHI, THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE- SIWAN……………………… OPP. PARTIES ----------- 2 27-9-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. It appears from annexure-1 that a Division Bench of this Court while considering grievances of the petitioners passed an order dated 3-11-2004 so as to prevent alleged encroachment upon land of the Rajkiya Kanya Prathmik Vidyalaya, Gothi, Siwan. It was also directed by the Divison Bench that steps be taken to get the unauthorized occupants cleared. From order dated 7-2-2007 passed in a contempt 2 application preferred by the petitioner earlier bearing M.J.C. No. 2313 of 2005 it transpires that show cause was filed in this proceeding on 20th September,2005 in which the stand was taken that the order of the court has been complied with. Since the petitioner had not filed any reply to the show cause and on 7-2-2007 the contempt application was disposed of. The present contempt petition reiterating the same grievance was filed on 18-2-2009. From annexure-2 to the present contempt application it appears that the Sub-divisional Officer, Siwan Sadar wrote this letter on 4th April 2005 to inform the District Magistrate, Siwan as to the compliance of the order of this Court dated 3-11-2004. Paragraph-7 of that letter discloses that a public road passes through the land of the Rajkiya Kanya Vidyalaya, Kothi and that road is in public interest and has been improved by providing bricks soling at the cost of the Government. A newly constructed Panchayat Bhawan involving a cost of Rs.2,60,000/- has also been completed. That construction was duly approved and permission had been granted by the Deputy Development Commissioner, Siwan on 3-11-2003. Hence the S.D.O. informed the District 3 Magistrate that the public road and Panchayat Bhawan are serving the interest of public and should not be treated as an encroachment upon a land of the Government and any order for demolition of the road or Panchayat Bhawan would cause loss as well as inconvenience to the public and several complications and problems may arise. The letter further mentions that any other kind of encroachment on the land of the school have been removed. Considering the entire facts and circumstances appearing from the letter of the S.D.O. dated 4-4-2005, we are of the view that although the order of the Division Bench was passed in public interest but now the requirements of public interest do not warrant any further interference by this Court. Hence, the contempt application is finally disposed of. Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)