IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15901 of 2004 LAKHAN SINGH Son of Late Janki Singh, resident of Village- Basatpur, P.S. Madanpur, P.O. Tuldiha, District- Aurangabad. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Collector, Aurangabad. 3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Aurangabad. 4. Circle Officer, Madanpur, Aurangabad. 5. Ram Raj Singh 6. Sheo Raj Singh Sons of Late Kauleshwar Singh. 7. Rajeshwar Singh Son of Late Ram Krit Singh 8. Baikunth Singh 9. Birendra Singh 10. Sunil Singh 11. Nand Singh @ Nawal Kumar Singh @ Nawal Singh Sons of Ram Raj Singh. All resident of Village- Basatpur, P.S. Madanpur, P.O. Tuldiha, District- Aurangabad. ----------- 7. 04.05.2011 Heard the parties. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition with a prayer that respondent nos. 1 to 4 be directed to remove encroachment made by respondent nos. 5 to 11 on a public land/road bearing Plot nos. 478 and 535, appertaining to Khata No. 63, area 2 decimals, situate at village- Basatpur, P.S. Madanpur, District- Aurangabad. The grievances of the petitioner is that a proceeding under the provisions of Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 (in short the ‘Act’) was initiated by the respondent Anchala Adhikari and a final order in terms of Section 6 of the Act was 2 passed, yet the encroachment made by the private respondents has not been removed as yet. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State officials, sworn by the respondent circle officer, wherein it has been stated that Encroachment case no. 3 of 1988-89 was started under the provisions of the Act for removal of the encroachment from the land bearing plot no. 535 appertaining to Khata No. 63. On conclusion of the proceeding final order was passed by the Anchala Adhikari and it was held that private respondents as also the petitioner have encroached upon the public land bearing plot no. 535 appertaining to Khata No. 63. and a direction was issued to remove the encroachment from the aforesaid public land. Some of the private respondents preferred Land Encroachment Appeal Case No. 2 of 1990-91, which was finally allowed by order dated 13.4.1992 in terms of Section 11 of the Act. It has been claimed by the authorities that in view of the aforesaid appellate order encroachment could not be removed. After hearing the parties and on perusal of the materials available on records, this Court further finds that after the order passed in aforesaid encroachment case, some other proceedings was 3 started at the instance of the petitioner under Section 133 and 144 Cr.P.C. Admittedly, an order passed under Section 144 Cr.P.C. is valid only for a period of two months, unless a fresh proceeding is started or that proceeding is converted under Section 145 Cr.P.C. There appears to be some private dispute between the petitioner at one side and the private respondents at the other side with respect to the lands in question, which cannot be adjudicated in the present proceeding. In the aforesaid fact and circumstances, the present writ petition seems to be completely misconceived. It is, accordingly, rejected. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may pursue other legal remedy available to him under the law before the appropriate authority/Court. No Costs. Anand Kr. ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)