IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6595 of 2008 1. Hajari Lal Rajak, Son of Late Sukhdeo Prasad Rajak. 2. Manu Rajak, Son of Lemu Rajak. 3. Dilip Rajak, Son of Sadhu Prasad Rajak. All residents of Village- Patsa, P.S. Bihta, District-Patna…………………………………………………………………....Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through the District Magistrate, Patna. 2. Land Reforms Commissioner, Bihar, Patna. 3. Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna. 4. District Magistrate, Patna. 5. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Danapur. 6. Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Danapur, Patna. 7. Circle Officer, Bihta, P.S.Bihta, District- Patna………………..Respondents 1st party. 8. Ram Binay Bishkarma(Lohar), Son of Late Prem Chand Biskarma. 9. Harendar Biskarma. 10. Manoj Biskarma. 11. Vinod Biskarma. All sons of late Ram Nath Biskarma(Lohar). 12. Parusan Biskarma @ Parshuram (Lohar), son of Late Khakhanu Biskarma. 13. Sheopujan Singh(Koiri), Son of Late Jagrup Singh. 14. Suresh Bhagat. 15. Sadhu Bhagat. 16. Mahesh Bhagat. All sons of Sudama Bhagat(Gareri). 17. Arun Thakur. 18. Varun Thakur. Both sons of Late Ramayan Thakur(Hajam). 19. Bhuneshwar Thakur. 20. Rajendra Thakur.Both sons of late Dasai Thakur(Hajam). 21. Hari Prasad Singh. 22. Chadrashekhar Singh. Both sons of Bhagwan Singh(Koiri). 23. Rampyare, Son of Gowardhan(Koiri). 24. Baijnath, son of Deonandan Mistri(Barhi). 25. Ram Lagan Pandit( Kumhar), son of late Sohan Pandit. 26. Deo Narayan Thakur( Hajam), son of late Srichand. All residents of Village-Patsa, P.S.Bihta, District- Patna……………………..……………………..Respondents 2nd party. ----------- 3. 08.07.2011. Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and the respondents. The petitioners have filed this writ application for removal of encroachment made over the Dhobi Ghat comprising Khata No. 362, Survey Plot No. 35, Thana No. 59, area- 2 1 acre 50 decimal situated in village- Patsa within Bihta Anchal in the district of Patna. It appears that earlier the petitioners had filed a writ application being C.W.J.C. No. 8601 of 1989 impleading the private respondents as encroachers, wherein in the counter affidavit it was pleaded that encroachment proceeding was already initiated vide Land Encroachment Case No. 04 of 1992-93 but the same was rejected vide order dated 14.09.1992 passed by the learned D.C.L.R., Danapur. The petitioners then preferred an appeal before the learned District Magistrate, Patna, in Land Encroachment Appeal No. 11 of 1992-93 and vide order dated 23.02.1996, the Appellate Court set aside the order passed by the learned D.C.L.R., Danapur, in Land Encroachment Case No. 04 of 1992-93. The matter was challenged by instant private respondents in C.W.J.C. No. 5012 of 1996 which was also dismissed by an order passed by a Bench of this Court on 31.07.2000. The order of writ court was challenged in L.P.A. No. 1346 of 2000 and the same was also 3 disposed off with a direction that “it would be open for the appellants to move before the civil court for declaration of their right, title and interest.” But in spite of the aforesaid orders the encroachment proceeding was not removed by the respondent authorities. The petitioners then filed a writ application being C.W.J.C. No. 11921 of 2002 which was disposed off on 06.04.2004 in view of the fact that an order of injunction was passed with regard to the land in question in Title Suit No. 13 of 2003 by which the present petitioners were restrained from demolishing the structure. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in proceeding before the civil court only 06 decimals of land is involved out of 1.50 acres of disputed public land but the same was not pointed out before this court in the earlier proceeding being C.W.J.C. NO. 11921 of 2002. In the circumstances, let the authority consider this fact and if 6 decimal of land is involved in the suit pending before the civil court then with 4 regard to rest of the land in question it is expected that the authorities should comply the order passed by the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1346 of 2000 disposed off on 24.10.2000. With this observation, this writ application is disposed off. U. K. ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)