IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.900 of 2007 1.SURESH MEHTA 2. Mani Kant Mehta 3. Murlidhar Mehta 4.Manendra Singh 5. Sachchidanand Mehta 6. Basant Kumar Mehta 7. Suman Kumar Mehta @ Suman Kumar Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.The Director General of Police,Bihar. 3.The Superintendent of Police, Madhepura.4.The Collector, Madhepura 5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Udakishanganj, Madhepura 6.The S.D.O., Udakishanganj,Madhepura 7.The Officer-in- Charge, Alam Nagar, Madhepura 8. The B.D.O.,Alam Nagar, Madhepura 9.The C.O.,Alam Nagar, Madhepura and others. 3 10.11.2008 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The grievance of the petitioners is that though the S.D.M., Udakishunganj vide order dated 21.5.2001 passed in Misc. Case No.775/97 had found the petitioners in possession of the land in question still some encroachment made on the land have not been removed. The S.D.M. on 4.1.2007 passed order for adequate police and magisterial force for putting the petitioners in complete possession. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the aforesaid order passed by the S.D.M. has not yet been complied. He submits that the petitioners have filed application before the District Magistrate, Madhepura, as contained in Annexure-6, for putting them in possession in terms of the order passed under section 145 Cr.P.C. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties this Court finds that the S.D.M., Udakishunganj, Madhepura, has found the possession of the petitioners over the land in question which has 2 been upheld by the revisional court also. The District Magistrate will dispose of the application of the petitioners as contained in Annexure-6 within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order taking into consideration that the order passed by the S.D.M., confirming the possession of the petitioners has not been unsettled by any other. With the aforesaid observation this writ application is allowed. Anilksinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)