IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.437 of 2005 1. RAM NATH YADAV. 2. Jagarnath Yadav. Both are sons of late Raj Kumar Yadav. And are residents of Village & P.O. Rafipur, P.S. Hussainganj, District-Siwan. ……Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Commissioner-cum- Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Siwan. 3. The Sub-divisional Magistrate, Siwan. 4. Ramdeo Choudhary, Son of late Nanhak Choudhary. 5. Deonandan Yadav. 6. Ramanand Yadav. 7. Birendra Yadav. 8. Harendra Yadav. 9. Kanhaiya Yadav. 10. Manai Yadav. 11. Dhanai Yadav. All are sons of Ramdeo Choudhary. 12. Ramraj Choudhary, Son of late Nahak Choudhary. 13. Tilak Choudhary, Son of Somari Choudhary. Serial Nos. 4 to 13 are residents of Village & P.O. Rafipur, P.S.-Hussainganj, District-Siwan. 14. Rama Shankar Chaukidar, Son of late Shiv Kumar Singh, Village & P.O. Raffipur, P.S.-Hussainganj, District-Siwan. 15. Mr. Ranjit Singh, Officer-in-charge, Hussainganj Police Station, District-Siwan. ……..Respondents ----------- For the petitioners : Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Adv. For the private respondents : Mrs. Sangeeta Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ranjan Dubey, Adv. For the State : Mr. A.K. Pandey, G.A.-9 ----------- 4/ 02.05.2011 Heard the parties. 2 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that though their right and title with respect to certain lands belonging to them have been declared by a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction, yet the private respondent nos. 4 to 13, without any authority of law, are creating obstruction in their peaceful possession over the lands in question. Local police officials are not taking prompt action for redressal of the valid grievances of the petitioners and for protecting their legal rights accrued to them by virtue of the judgment and order passed by the competent Civil Court. 3. It appears that Title Suit No.240 of 1985 was filed by one Raj Kumar Yadav, father of the petitioners, and that was decreed by the learned Sub Judge 1st, Siwan. Final decree was prepared and delivery of possession was effected in favour of the petitioners with respect to takhta allotted to them. Separate title suit filed by the respondents with respect to lands in question, as also for setting aside the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No.240 of 1985 appears to have been dismissed. 3 Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that respondents in no way can question the right and title of the petitioners with respect to lands claimed by them on the basis of judgment and decree of the civil court, which are subject matter of controversy in the present proceeding. 5. By an order dated 05.09.2005 passed by a Bench of this Court, notice was issued to the respondent nos.4 to 13. Despite service of notice and despite their appearance through a lawyer, no counter affidavit has been filed till date on their behalf. No counter affidavit has been filed even on behalf of the State of Bihar and its functionaries, though the matter has remained pending before this Court since 10.01.2005 i.e. more than six years. In the given facts of the case, the averments made in the writ petition have to be accepted. 6. After having heard the parties and on consideration of materials available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the grievance raised on behalf of the petitioners in the present proceeding must be promptly and properly looked 4 into by respondent no.2 (Superintendent of Police, Siwan) and if required, appropriate corrective measures must be taken by him. 7. The petitioners are hereby directed to appear before the respondent-Superintendent of Police, Siwan within a period of four weeks from today with a certified copy of the present order and a detailed representation raising their grievances, which have been raised in the present proceeding. If such a representation is filed before the respondent- Superintendent of Police, Siwan, within the time prescribed by this Court, accompanied by a certified copy of the present order, then he shall be obliged to consider the same in accordance with law. After holding proper enquiry either by his own or by some competent officials under his control, and after giving opportunity of hearing to all concerned, respondent-Superintendent of Police shall further be obliged to take appropriate corrective measures within a period of three months from the date of filing of such representation. If after an enquiry, the respondent-Superintendent of Police, Siwan comes 5 to a finding that private respondents are taking law in their own hands, then they are required to be prosecuted in an appropriate criminal prosecution and directions to the effect may be issued within the aforesaid specified time. 8. However, if the petitioners do not appear within the time prescribed before the respondent- Superintendent of Police, Siwan with a certified copy of the present order and a detailed representation, then it shall be construed that the present writ petition has finally been rejected by this Court. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ petition stands finally disposed of. No costs. Anjani/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)