IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6792 of 2008 (1) Rewati Raman Prasad, son of Late Kartick Prasad, resident of J-6, PC Colony, Kankarbagh, Dist. Patna. (2) Girish Kumar, son of Shree Chandu Ram, resident of MIG Colony, House No. 267, Kankarbagh, PS Kankarbagh, Dist. Patna – Petitioners. Vs. (1) The State of Bihar through Secretary, Department of Urban Development, Bihar, Patna. (2) The Secretary, Department of Urban Development, Bihar, Patna. (3) The Municipal Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation. (4) The District Magistrate, Patna. (5) The Secretary, Road Construction Department, Bihar, Patna. (6) Shri Shiv Mohan Prasad, Secretary, 100, MIG, Residential Welfare Association, Lohiya Nagar, Kankarbagh, Patna – Respondents. … For the petitioners : Mr. Alok Kumar Sinha, Mr. Indrajeet Bhushan and Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocates. For the State: Mr. Rabindra Kumar Choubey, SC VIII and Mr. Ashok Kumar Verma, AC to SC VIII. For respondent no. 6 : Mr. Rabindra Prasad, Advocate. For the P.M.C.: Mr. Nikesh Kumar. For intervener respondent: Mr. Ram Suresh Roy, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Rashid Izhar and Mr. Manish, Advocates. 5 3.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State counsel and the counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.6. Petitioner no.1 is not a resident of 100 MIG, Lohiya Nagar, Kankarbagh, Patna whereas petitioner no. 2 is the resident of plot no. 267 of the said colony. Therefore, petitioner no.2 is the only person who has the right to maintain this writ petition. The petitioner’s case is that respondent no. 6 is not a registered association and without taking the consent of the residents of the colony has constructed two huge gates blocking the entry to the colony from the west and the south between plot nos. 295 and 254 and between plot nos. 269 and 351. It is said that 2 the said blockade amounts not only to encroachment but is also a deterrent to the residents of the colony to enter and exit from the colony according to their convenience and wishes. An intervention application has been filed by the owner of plot no. 269, who claims that the said blockade has been made with the consent of all the members of the association. The case of the Association is that this gate has been built in order to protect the residents from theft, burglary, molestation etc which has become the order of the day. The petitioner’s objection mainly revolves around the fact that by constructing the gate on main entry point, the Association and specifically residents of plot nos. 295, 264, 269 and 351 have protected themselves but since the colony is exposed on all four sides, there is no guarantee or actual deterrent to the miscreants taking advantage of the citizens of the colony. It is said that all those persons who are on the outer road to the colony are exposed to the danger of theft etc. The petitioner had earlier moved this court, this court refused to interfere in the matter, observing that the petitioner may take recourse to section 3 of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956. The petitioner then moved before the Commissioner of the Patna Municipal Corporation complaining that the construction made on the said road, is without permission of the Corporation, it is unmanned and remains closed at all times which cannot be permitted. The Commissioner after hearing both the sides and on considering the report of the district administration 3 came to the conclusion that the two gates have been constructed for security reasons. While going through the writ petition, the intervention petition which is being allowed by this court, as well as the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.6, this court comes to the conclusion that the construction has been made in a very hap-hazard manner, but nevertheless, it has been made for security purposes of large number of members of the colony. This court notices that there is one small gate which allows persons to enter by foot and allows bicycle or two wheelers to enter in the colony. It appears from the pictures which have been shot during the day, that both the gates were closed when the pictures were taken! In a colony where for security purposes, certain measures are taken by the Association of the colony concerned, this court would not like to interfere, unless there is some gross illegality pointed out by the parties aggrieved. In this particular case the only apprehension of the court is that these gates which are the subject matter of dispute seem to remain closed during the day as well, which cannot be permitted. The Association i.e. respondent no. 6 should ensure that the gates are open from 6 in the morning to 9 at night to allow free entry into the colony and appoint some one to man the gates or else the construction of the gates in the manner in which it has been done would not be permissible. In all colonies, be it anywhere in India, there is always a provision that some or one of the main gates should 4 remain opened during the day hours, in order to allow free exit or entry into the colony. In the circumstances this writ petition is being disposed of with a direction to the Association, respondent no.6 to ensure that at least one of the two gates remains open from 6 AM to 9 PM. The Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation would make surprise inspection to ensure that the order of this court is being duly complied with. This writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J .)