IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16611 of 2009 1. KOKIL RAI S/O LATE MUNESHWAR RAI R/O VILL.- KHUSHIHAL DUMARI, P.O.- GOREYAKOTHI (MARACHHI), BLOCK- LAKARI NAVIGANJ, P.S.- JAMO BAZAR, DISTT.- SIWAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER SARAN DIVISION AT CHAPRA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SIWAN 4. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER MAHARAJGANJ, DISTT.- SIWAN 5. THE CIRCLE OFFICER LAKARI NAVIGANJ, DISTT.- SIWAN 6. THE CIRCLE OFFICER BASANTPUR, DISTT.- SIWAN 7. THE OFFICER INCHARGE JAMO POLICE STATION, DISTT.- SIWAN 8. SHEONATH RAI S/O LATE DIGAMBAR RAI R/O VILL.- KHUSHIHAL DUMARI, P.O.- MARACHHI, P.S.- JAMO BAZAR, DISTT.- SIWAN 9. ASHESHAR RAI S/O LATE DIGAMBAR RAI R/O VILL.- KHUSHIHAL DUMARI, P.O.- MARACHHI, P.S.- JAMO BAZAR, DISTT.- SIWAN 10. BHAGESHAR RAI S/O LATE SITAMBAR RAI R/O VILL.- KHUSHIHAL DUMARI, P.O.- MARACHHI, P.S.- JAMO BAZAR, DISTT.- SIWAN 11. RAJARAM RAI S/O CHETHARU RAI R/O VILL.- KHUSHIHAL DUMARI, P.O.- MARACHHI, P.S.- JAMO BAZAR, DISTT.- SIWAN 12. CHANDRADEEP RAI S/O LATE HARANGI RAI R/O VILL.- KHUSHIHAL DUMARI, P.O.- MARACHHI, P.S.- JAMO BAZAR, DISTT.- SIWAN 13. DAROGA RAI S/O LATE JALESHWAR RAI R/O VILL.- KHUSHIHAL DUMARI, P.O.- MARACHHI, P.S.- JAMO BAZAR, DISTT.- SIWAN 14. RAM EKBAL RAI S/O VISHWANATH RAI R/O VILL.- KHUSHIHAL DUMARI, P.O.- MARACHHI, P.S.- JAMO BAZAR, DISTT.- SIWAN 15. JAMADAR RAI S/O LATE TAPESHWAR RAI R/O VILL.- KHUSHIHAL DUMARI, P.O.- MARACHHI, P.S.- JAMO BAZAR, DISTT.- SIWAN 16. ASHESHWAR RAI S/O LATE ALAGU RAI R/O VILL.- KHUSHIHAL DUMARI, P.O.- MARACHHI, P.S.- JAMO BAZAR, DISTT.- SIWAN ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Umesh Kr. Mishra, Adv. For the State:- S.C.-10 ------------ 2. 6.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2 It is submitted that Land Encroachment Case No. 1 of 2008-09 was initiated against the private respondent nos. 8 to 16 for Gairmajarua land as well as public road bearing Khata No. 62, Survey No. 670, Thana No. 50 of village Khusihal Dumari, Police Station-Jamo Bazar, District-Siwan. It is the case of the petitioner that final orders have been passed in the Land Encroachment proceedings on 10.7.2009. The private respondents preferred C.W.J.C. No. 11393 of 2009 which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to move the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for the same relief. A counter affidavit is stated to have been filed on behalf of the State on 3.12.2010. Copy of the same is not available on record. Let the office trace it and place it on record. The Court requested the learned State counsel to make available his copy of the affidavit for perusal so as not to hold up the proceedings on that ground. The Registry shall retain on record a Xerox copy of the counter affidavit placed during submissions. Learned counsel for the State from the counter affidavit acknowledges that final orders have been passed in the Land Encroachment proceeding but it has not been implemented till date. Seeking to justify non implementation reliance is placed on a Title Suit No. 592 of 2009 preferred by the private respondents for declaration of 3 title and possession in which the respondents had appeared and filed written statement. Injunction was rejected on 29.4.2010. Aggrieved the private respondents have preferred Misc. Appeal No. 16 of 2010 which is pending disposal. The writ Court finds it difficult to appreciate as to why the respondents seek the shelter of orders of the writ Court. From their counter affidavit it is more than apparent that they appeared to be reluctant to discharge their statutory duties. Unless and until there is an order of a competent Court of law preventing them from executing the final order passed in the Land Encroachment proceeding the respondents are bound to comply the same. Any voluntary act on part of the official respondents in desisting from performing of their statutory duties in a supposed presumption of certain orders of a Court of law which may or may not be forthcoming can hardly be a justification. The writ petition is disposed with the directions to the respondents to act in accordance with law for taking the final order in the Land Encroachment Proceeding to its logical conclusion, in accordance with law without delay. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)