IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17777 of 2008 Kashikant Jha, Son of Shobhakant Jha, resident of village-Bhaurgardh, P.S.-Nanpur, District-Sitamarhi. …………Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Sitamarhi. 3. The Sub-divisional Officer, Pupari, Sitamarhi. 4. The Block Development Officer, Bokhara, Sitamarhi. 5. The Circle Officer, Bokhara, Sitamarhi. 6. Shambhu Jha, son of Basanti Jha. 7. Indrakant Jha, son of Acchuta Nand Jha. 8. Sudhir Jha, son of Raji Nand Jha. Respondent No.6,7&8 are resident of village-Bhaurgardh, P.S.-Nanpur, District-Sitamarhi. ………… Respondents. ----------- 02 21.01.2010 Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has filed representation before the respondent no.2, the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Sitamarhi alleging encroachment by some private people on public road and for its removal as it is causing nuisance to public. In my view, the remedy of the petitioner is either under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or seeking the intervention of the district authorities under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act. Apparently, as petitioner has already moved before the Collector, it is only expected that the Collector would take action as appropriate in the facts found by him in accordance with law in the shortest possible time as it is a case of public inconvenience. The Collector should take appropriate action in accordance with law and pass final orders after such enquiry and initiating such proceedings as he may deem fit and proper preferably within a period of six months from the date this order is produced before him. - 2 - Let it be recorded that this Court has not applied itself to the facts in issue which are for the Collector to look into, enquire and decide in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Trivedi ( Navaniti Prasad Singh, J. )