IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.123 of 2008 JAINENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, S/O LATE BASUDEO LAL, R/O VILLAGE-SIPAH, P.S. ARWAL, DISTRICT- ARWAL. -PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER MAGADH DIVISION, GAYA. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ARWAL, DISTRICT- ARWAL. 3. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, JEHANABAD. 4. THE SUBDIVISIONAL OFFICER, ARWAL, DISTRICT-ARWAL. 5. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ARWAL DISTRICT-ARWAL. 6. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, ARWAL, DISTRICT- ARWAL. 7. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, ARWAL BLOCK, DISTRICT-ARWAL. 8. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ARWAL, DISTRICT-ARWAL. 9. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ARWAL, DISTRICT-ARWAL. 10. OFFICER IN CHARGE, ARWAL P.S., DISTRICT-ARWAL. 11. YOGENDRA YADAV, S/O LATE NAND KESHWAR YADAV, R/O VILLAGE-SIPAH, ARWAL, P.S.& DISTRICT-ARWAL. -RESPONDENTS 3 27.04.2009 This is a petition for grant of police protection to the petitioner and his family member. It is the case of the petitioner that khata no.90 of plot no. 524 is owned and possessed by him from his grand father’s time and when he wanted to reconstruct the dilapidated old house the respondents objected to the same 2 and Police is helping the party respondents. In the counter affidavit it is stated that there is claim and counter claim over the land. Right to adjudicate title and possession over property is civil dispute and ultimately the Civil Court has power over the same and not this Court in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Police also cannot decide that question. However, the Police is directed to see that law and order is maintained and lives of the parties are protected. The representations filed by the petitioner before the Superintendent of Police should be considered according to law and appropriate action should be taken if allegations made by the petitioner are correct. This petition is disposed of as above. (J.B. Koshy, CJ.) AAhmad 3