IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14130 of 2009 1. DASRATH SHAH S/O HAZARI PRASAD SHAH R/O FRIENDS COLONY, WARD NO. 14, MADHUBANI, P.S. TOWN THANA, DISTT. MADHUBANI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE CIRCLE OFFICER BLOCK RAHIKA, DISTT. MADHUBANI 3. THE NAGAR PARISHAD, MADHUBANI, THROUGH EXECUTIVE OFFICER 4. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER MADHUBANI, NAGAR PARISHAD, MADHUBANI 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MADHUBANI with CWJC No.14275 of 2009 1. RAM KUMARI DEVI W/O TUNAI KARAK MOH.- SURATGANJ, WARD NO. 15, MADHUBANI, P.S. TOWN THANA, DISTT.- MADHUBANI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MADHUBANI 2. THE CIRCLE OFFICER BLOCK RAHIKA, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 3. THE NAGAR PARISHAD, MADHUBANI THROUGH EXECUTIVE OFFICER 4. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MADHUBANI NAGAR PARISHAD, MADHUBANI ----------- For the Petitioners:- Mr. Birendra Kant Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Baidyanath Thakur, Adv. Mr. Anand Kumar, Adv. For the Nagar Parishad:- Mr. Pursottam Jha, Adv. For the State:- S.C.-2 and S.C. 13 -------------- 3. 28.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, for the State and for the Nagar Parishad, Madhubani. It is the case of the petitioners that they were allotted certain lands by the Nagar Parishad, Madhubani, on payment of salami for construction of a shop at their own expense and were then required to pay rent also. They have come to this Court aggrieved by the order dated 4.7.2009 for demolition of their shops by the District Administration alleging encroachment. 2 The counter affidavit on behalf of the State Administration takes the stand that the settlement made by the Municipality was illegal and the Municipality had no jurisdiction to make settlement of Government lands. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Municipality. Counsel for the parties are unanimous that the application may be disposed off in similar terms as C.W.J.C. No. 9310 of 2009, dealing with a like settlement made by the Nagar Parishad, Madhubani. The distinguishing feature in these two cases from that in C.W.J.C. No. 9310 of 2009 is that the shops of the petitioners have already been demolished. For reasons of the discussion contained in C.W.J.C. No. 9310 of 2009, it has now become the joint obligation of the State and the Municipality to rehabilitate the petitioners in similar manner and on similar terms and conditions as was earlier given to them subject to any escalation clause as may be contained in the original agreement. Since the shops are claimed to have been constructed by the petitioners, the respondents are obliged to provide them similar constructed premises at the costs of the respondents. Let this order be complied with within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 3 The writ application stands disposed in similar terms as C.W.J.C. No. 9310 of 2009. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)