IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.764 of 2010 1. GAURI SHANKAR PATHAK 2. SHIV SHANKAR PATHAK AND 3. PREM SHANKAR PATHAK, ALL SONS OF LATE CHUNCHUN PATHAK, GOSAIN TOLA, PATLIPUTRA, PATNA. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR 3. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BIHAR 4. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, PATNA 5. SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATNA 6. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTWALI 7. OFFICER IN CHARGE, PATLIPUTRA POLICE STATION 8. INDIAN BANK, MAIN BRANCH, GANDHI MAIDAN 9. KENARA BANK, PATLIPTRA BRANCH. 10. DR SHANKARANAND UPADHYAY, MAHTHADIH, KODARMA, HAZARIBAGH, AT PRESET STATIO ROAD, PURSA BAZAAR NATHUPUR, PARSA BAZAAR,PATNA. ----------- 2 26.08.2010. Petitioners pray for directing the respondents first set to provide proper security of the life and property and to institute F.I.R. against the private respondents and others with a further direction that the industries, namely, M/s JR Industrial Switchgears Corporation and Avantika Enterprises situated over plot no. 712 khata no. 802 situated at Mauza Manpura, Gosaitola may not be disturbed at the hands of the private respondents. They submit that all of them are three brothers and their father had purchased land vide deed no. 5975 dated 23.7.1958 area 1.48 acres of land appertaining to khata no. 802 khesra no. 712 and 1838. He gave 2.25 katha of land to each of them from this plot in which they have constructed their respective houses and residing in the same plot. Father of petitioners opened an Industry, namely, Hindustan Multi Engineering Corporation at plot no. 1838 which was a proprietorship firm registered under SSI Units bearing Regd. No. I/Ind-DI/1973/3379 and the said proprietorship firm was established after taking loan from PNB, Exhibition Road Branch, Patna. 2 When father of petitioners failed to repay the loan, bank filed Title Mortgage Suit no. 353/96for redemption of the mortgage deed but no sooner the same was cleared by petitioner no.2, Bank issued no dues certificate, consequently Bank withdrew case from the Debt Recovery Tribunal on 9.11.2004 in Case No. PT-16/2000. Application filed by private respondent, namely, Shankaranand Upadhyay, a share holder in the industry in question before the Tribunal too was rejected. Further case of petitioners is that they leased out a part of their land bearing plot no. 712 to one best Tower Private Limited, which Firm established Industry over the said vacant portion of land, whereas two industries, namely, M/s JR Industries Switchgear and Avantika Enterprises vide registration no. 0310027566 dated 21.6.2005 and 031016816 dated 9.5.2000 were established in the remaining portion of same land by petitioner no.1 and son of petitioner no.3, namely, Gauri Shankar Pathak and Avinish Shankar Pathak . For establishing these factories, petitioner Gauri Shankar Pathak took loan of Rs. 90 lakh from Indian Bank and Avinish Shankar Pathak took loan of Rs. 8.5 lakh from Canara Bank. Earlier petitioner Gauri Shankar Pathak and Prem Shankar Pathak had established an industries, namely, Hindustan Electrical and Switchgears Corporation over plot no. 712 after taking loan form Bank of India. Father of petitioners was the guarantor and the said industry also became sick and accordingly when they failed to repay the loan in time, a case was filed before the DRT, Patna being PT No. 11/01. In the said case, warrant of sale of property was issued by the DRT under the signature of recovery officer in Khata no. 802 Khesra no. 712 area 1.10 acre as well as khesra no. 1838 3 area 38 decimals. An agreement was arrived with petitioner no.1 and 3 with Bank of India and on the basis of said compromise, the case was finally disposed of vide order dated 27.9.2006. In 1996, when father of petitioners was aged about 97 years, respondent no.10 filed suit with false facts. The father of petitioners had no knowledge of suit. On basis of forged signature of petitioner’s father, a compromise decree was obtained in 1996. In 1997, the father of petitioners died at the age of 98 years. Petitioners filed Misc. case being Misc. Case No. 3 of 1998 for setting aside the said compromise judgment and decree passed in Title suit no. 269 of 1996, which was dismissed by the Sub judge I, Patna vide order dated 16.7.2008 and revision against same was also dismissed. Private respondent filed an application for getting his name mutated over plot no. 712 and 1838 before the Anchal Adhikari, Sadar, Patna being Mutation case no. 303/1 of 2004-05and vide order dated 20.7.2005 the same has been rejected. It is alleged that private respondent started creating disturbance and on 19.7.2010 he along with others looted properties of the factories for which complaints were made to the Police Station concerned, but police has not taken any steps in this regard. Learned counsel for the State submits that petitioners should have moved the authorities concerned, in stead of approaching this Court directly in the writ jurisdiction. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file an application before the City Superintendent of Police, Patna, who would look into the matter. The 4 learned Superintendent of Police would hear both sides. Parties are at liberty to produce their relevant papers in support of the case. This court has not made any opinion regarding merits of the case. Shashi. ( Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)