IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.497 of 2008 GEETA PRASAD ROY & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the appellants : Dr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Senior Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Lalit Kishore, A.A.G. III. Mr. Satyabir Bharti, J.C. to AAG III ------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ----------- Dated, the 5th August, 2008. The appeal suffers from delay of 55 days and for condonation thereof, I.A. No. 3803 of 2008 has been made. Even if we condone the delay in filing the appeal, we are of the considered view that this L.P.A. is wholly misconceived and devoid of any substance. 2. If respondent no. 8 has forcibly occupied the appellants’ land, for its removal, the appellants must pursue appropriate remedy available in law. Besides the ordinary remedy of civil suit, the appellants have also remedy under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In paragraph 5 of the supplementary affidavit, it is stated that there is/was no dispute either in the nature of civil suit nor a proceeding under sections 144 and 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is/was ever between the parties. In absence - 2 - thereof, the writ application, invoking high prerogative writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on a purported ground that respondent no. 8 has forcibly, on the point of gun, occupied the appellants’ land, cannot be entertained. 3. The consideration of the matter by the Single Judge, thus, cannot be faulted. L.P.A. is dismissed in limine. However, this will not preclude the appellants to pursue the remedy available to them in law for redressal of their grievances. 4. This disposes of I.A. No. 3803 of 2008 as well. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J Anil/