IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.527 of 2007 Shiv Prasad Singh, S/o Late Parmeshwar Mahto, resident of village Lakhanpura, Ghugaritarh, P.S. Civil Lines, Town & District Gaya………………………Plaintiff-Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Gaya 2. The Collector, Gaya 3. The Land Revenue Deputy Collector, Gaya 4. The Anchal Adhikari,Town Block Chandauti,Gaya 5. Shiv Balak Yadav S/o Laloo Yadav Resident of village Ghugaritarh, P.S. Civil Lines, Gaya, ……….Defendants-Opposite parties For the petitioner : M/s R.K. P. Singh and Manish Kishore, Advocates. For the opposite parties : Ms. Binita Singh, Asst. counsel to AAG.III. ------------ 02/ 02.09.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and its authorities. 2. This civil revision has been filed by plaintiff- petitioner challenging order dated 03.02.2007 by which the learned Subordinate Judge-II, Gaya allowed the intervention application of opposite party no.5 and added him as defendant in Title Suit No.85 of 2005. 3. The aforesaid suit was filed by the plaintiff- petitioner for declaration of his title and confirmation of his possession over the suit land and also for a declaration that the order passed by the authorities concerned in public land encroachment case was illegal, without jurisdiction and not binding on the plaintiff and also that the Municipal Survey 2 Authority had wrongly recorded Plot No.5074 as Anabad Sarva Sadharan Public Road in the Draft Khatian of Municipal Survey, which cannot extinguish the right, title and interest of the plaintiff over the suit land along with other ancillary reliefs etc. 4. The said suit was contested by the defendants, including the State of Bihar and its authorities, whereafter issues were framed and evidence started. In the meantime, an intervention application was filed by opposite party no.5 for being added as a party to the suit being a member of Public, which was using the said Anabad Sarva Sadharan Public Road. This application has been allowed by the learned court below vide its order dated 03.02.2007, which is under challenge in the instant civil revision. 5. From the averments as well as from the materials on record, including the impugned order it is quite apparent that in the Municipal Survey the suit land has been recorded as Anabad Sarva Sadharan Public Road in the Draft Khatian and encroachment case with respect to the said land considering it as a public land was allowed by the authorities concerned and even the appeal against it was dismissed by the Collector. Considering the above facts the learned court below was quite justified in allowing the intervention application in public interest. 6. In the said circumstances, this court does not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the impugned order of the learned court below. Accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed. 3 However, this order for addition or impleadment of opposite party no.5 as a defendant in the suit should not be taken as a point against the plaintiff’s case, as the suit has to be decided on its own basis according to the pleadings and evidence of the parties as well as the specific provisions of law, expeditiously. harish/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )