IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4352 of 2002 Md. Muslim, son of Manshi Hussain, resident of Village-Parsa, P.O.-Bagheji Rampur, Via-Barauli, District-Gopalganj. ………………………………………………. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj. 3. The Sub-divisional Officer,Gopalganj. 4. The Superintendent of Police, Gopalganj. 5. The circle Officer, Barauli, Gopalganj. 6. Manjoor Alam 7. Sanna Ullah 8. Akhtar Alam All sons of Chand 9. Md. Kasim 10. Md. Hashim. 11. Md. Salim Respondent no. 9 to 11 all son of Md. Ismail. 12. Md. Farooq 13. Md. Ayub 14. Md. Nayab 15. Md. Naushad Alam Respondent no. 12 to 15 all son of Md. Ishak 16. Md. Hasnain, son of Abdul Subhan 17. Maqsood Alam, S/o Abdul Wahab 18. Saniwllah, s/o Abdul Jalil. 19. Abdul Bari, S/o Abdul Rahman 20. Abdul Khalim, S/o Abdul Rahman 21. Nawabuddin, S/o Nahiuddin All Respondent no. 6 to 21 resident of Village-Parsa Anchal Barauli, District- Gopalganj. ……………………………………………………… Respondents ----------- 8. 16.4.2009 Heard Mr. Manu Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned J.C. to AAGIII for the State. The petitioner has approached this Court for a very plain and simple relief that if there be an encroachment on the public road, being in Khata No. 828, Thana 2 No. 259 in village Parsa under Barauli Circle of Gopalganj District, which according to him was existing on 3.4.2002, the date of filing of the writ petition, the same should be removed as it was obstructing his easementary rights. The petitioner in fact had set out his case at length in the writ application by also impleading respondents no. 6 to 21 who are said to be the persons responsible for causing encroachment on the public land. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit wherein it has been sought to be conveyed that on 7.9.2002 the Magistrate with the help of police had removed the entire encroachment in presence of the Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat and the other villagers. The respondents have also enclosed the documents by way of Annexures to the counter affidavit in support of the aforementioned fact. Annexure F(i), Annexure F(ii) and the compliance report (Annexure G to the counter affidavit) prima facie go to show that the encroachment as complained by the petitioner has already been removed. Mr. Mishra, however, would submit 3 that as the copy of the counter affidavit has been given to him just in the Court room today and as such he is not in a position to verify these facts. Normally it is expected that the official respondents in their affidavit before this Court would come out with true state of Affairs. Therefore, this Court has to also proceed on the basis that whatever has been stated in the counter affidavit is correct. Accordingly, while holding that this writ application has already served his purpose, inasmuch as the encroachment was removed after filing of the writ application, it would still give liberty to the petitioner to approach the Collector of the District as also the Circle Officer of the concerned Anchal, in case any part of the statement made in the counter affidavit with regard to alleged removal of encroachment is found to be incorrect. It goes without saying that on any such complaint made by the petitioner with regard to making of an incorrect statement in the counter affidavit as in respect of 4 removal of encroachment, the respondents shall immediately look into the matter and if any corrective action would be required the same will also be taken without any delay. This Court would also give liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court in case any part of the statement in the counter affidavit is found by him to be incorrect. This application, accordingly, stands disposed of with the aforementioned observation. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/