CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.11081 OF 1994 JAI JAI RAM KUMAR, son of Sri Suraj Kumar, resident of village & P.O. Godargama, P.S. Matihani, District – Begusarai. ---------------------- Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Collector, Begusarai, District – Begusarai. 3. The Sub-divisional Officer, Begusarai, District – Begusarai. 4. The Circle Officer, Matihani Anchal, Begusarai, District – Begusarai. ----------------------- Respondents. ---------------- For The Petitioner : Mr. S.S. Dvivedi, Sr. Adv. Mr. R.S. Dvivedi, Adv. Mr. L.L. Pandey, Adv. Mr. R.K. Dubey, Adv. For The Respondent : Mr. Anil Kumar Jha, G.A. 2 Mr. Uday Bhan Singh, J.C. to G.A. 2 P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ****************** A. K. Tripathi, J. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. There has been a prolonged legal battle between the petitioner and the State authorities with regard to a piece and parcel of land relating to Khata Nos. 448 & 137 Kesra Nos. 672 & 673, which the respondents state is a Gairmajarua Aam land. There have even been a civil suit filed by the petitioner claiming right, title and interest over the piece and parcel of land, but that effort only succeeded to a point because the judgment passed by the trial court was set aside in title appeal. On 16.09.1994, the Circle Officer, Matihani in the district of Begusarai had issued a notice to the petitioner to hand over vacant possession of the land or he shall be - 2 - removed by use of force. It is this notice which compelled the petitioner to come before the High Court in the present writ application. Submission of learned senior counsel for the petitioner is that in the above noted background and the litigation, they have approached the Revenue Authorities to consider a request made by them to settle this land in his favour, keeping in mind that a house is in existence for many a years and the land in question is under occupation of the family. There are certain circulars and directions in this regard of the State Government, but even before the request could be acted upon the above notice contained in Annexure – 1 has come to be issued. Keeping the totality of the litigation in mind, the Court quashes Annexure – 1, gives an opportunity to the petitioner to approach the competent authority for a request of settlement of the land in question with him. If the authorities come to a considered opinion that the petitioner has made out a bonafide case for settlement then appropriate orders may be passed or else, they may invoke their powers under the Public Land Encroachment Act, after giving him a notice in this regard and on an adjudication, if it is so required. The writ application is allowed with the above liberty. Patna High Court The 23rd Day of December, 2008, NAFR/AFR, Rajeev/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) - 3 -