IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.4652 of 2010 Satyendra Narayan Singh son of Late Sakaldeep Narayan Singh, Incharge Headmaster of Project Girls High School, Madanpur P.O. & P.S.Madanpur District Aurangabad… Petitioner. Versus 1.The State Of Bihar. 2.Shri Kudan Kumar, D.M., Aurangabad. 3.Shri K.D.Projwal, S.D.O., Aurangabad. 4.Shri Ashok Kumar, C.O.,Madanpur, Aurangabad. 5.Satan Prasad Singh son of Sri Kameshwar Prasad Singh, resident of village Ugma P.S Madanpur District Aurangabad … Opp. Parties. ----------- 5. 13.10.2011 Heard learned counsel fort he petitioner, learned counsel for the St ate and Mr. Shambhu Sharan Singh, Advocate appearing for respondent no.5. The grievance of the petitioner was that in spite of direction of the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 2nd July 2004 (Annexure-1), the concerned authorities/opp. parties were not disposing of the Encroachment Case No.2 of 1996-97, although the Division Bench had indicated a time period of two months for the said purpose. The contempt petition was filed on 4th November 2010. After two adjournments for filing show cause, on 22nd June 2011, this Court was informed that the encroachment case has been disposed of after a delay of more than six years on 30th March 2011. On behalf of petitioner a grievance was raised that the disposal was not an effective 2 disposal because action was not being taken under Section 7 of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, pursuant to order and notice under Section 6 of the Act. In substance, the grievance was that the authorities had not removed the encroachment which they had found to be existing on the school/public land. This Court adjourned the matter under the expectation that the encroachment shall be removed within a reasonable time. As per show cause filed on behalf of O.P.Nos. 1 to 3 on 7th Sept ember 2011, the encroachment over 2 decimals of public land belonging to the Project Girls’ High School, Madanpur in Khata No.1, Plot No. 179 has been removed and the land was made encroachment free on 5th August 2011. In view of the aforesaid development, nothing more remains to be adjudicated in this contempt matter and it has to be finally disposed of but before that we have to put on record the stand of respondent no.5, the alleged encroacher. It has been submitted on behalf of respondent no.5 that no notice was issued to him in this contempt proceeding. That appears to be correct but since action for contempt could lie only against the authorities for not 3 disposing of the encroachment proceeding in accordance with law, opportunity of show cause was given only to official opposite parties represented by the learned counsel for the State. A further grievance has been raised on behalf of O.P.No.5 that the orders passed by the authorities holding the O.P.No.5 to be an encroacher are bad in law and not in accordance with law. It has furthe been submitted that he has preferred a writ petition before this Court against the original order as well as the appellate order and that writ petition bearing C.W.J.C.No. 11840 of 2011 has been directed to be listed before a Division Bench which had directed for removal of encroachment. An order to that effect was passed by the learned single Judge on 1st August 2011 but the writ petition has not been listed so far. Whatever be the worth of the case of O.P.No.5, it has to be determined and decided in the writ petition preferred by him. In view of the fact that according to the concerned authorities as well as the petitioner the required action has already been taken and the encroachment proceeding has been brought to conclusion by final action u/s 7 of the Act, continuance of this proceeding shall serve no purpose. 4 Hence, this contempt proceeding is finally disposed of but without any prejudice to the rights of the O.P.No.5 which may be decided in the pending writ petition in accordance with law. Jay/ (Shiva Kirti Singh,J) (Shivaji Pandey, J)