IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18967 of 2010 1. Bal Krishna Jha S/O Late Baidyanath Jha R/O Vill.-Zaferpur, P.O.Bachani, Via-Durganj, P.S.Purnea Sadar (Dagaruwa O.P), Distt.- Purnea. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Old Secretariate, Patna. 2. The Divisional Commissioner, Purnea Division, Purnea. 3. The District Magistrate, Purnea. 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Baisi, Distt.-Purnea. 5. The Circle Officer, Dararua, Distt-Purnea. 6. Dukhan Mandal S/O Not Known To The Petitioner R/O Vill.Balbari, P.O. Babhani, Via-Durgaganj, Distt.-Purnea. 7. Baharu Rishi S/O Not Known To The Petitioner R/O Vill.Balbari, P.O. Babhani, Via-Durgaganj, Distt.-Purnea. 8. Lakaria Rishi S/O Not Known To The Petitioner R/O Vill.Balbari, P.O. Babhani, Via-Durgaganj, Distt.-Purnea. 9. Chandar Rishi S/O Not Known To The Petitioner R/O Vill.Balbari, P.O. Babhani, Via-Durgaganj, Distt.-Purnea. 10. Sanichar Rishi S/O Not Known To The Petitioner R/O Vill.Balbari, P.O. Babhani, Via-Durgaganj, Distt.-Purnea. ------------------------- 2 16.11.2011 Heard Mr. Arbind Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ashok Kumar Verma, learned A.C. to S.C.8 for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the encroachment made by the private respondent Nos. 6 to 10 and some others on a public land which forms part of a Road Constructed under the Pradhan Mantri Gramin Sadak Yojana. It is the case of the petitioner that he having brought the aforesaid encroachment to the notice of the authorities under the Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) and who have also taken note thereof and have admitted the encroachment on a public land bearing Khata No. 73 and Kheshra 2 No. 78 and 213 situated in village-Balbari, Tuzi No.25 Thana No. 385 in the District of Purnea, no follow up action has been taken. Learned counsel with reference to certain enquiries having been conducted by the District authorities, submits that despite the position of encroachment being admitted by the District authorities they are not proceeding in the matter. Regard being had to the grievance set out in the writ petition as also the circumstance that despite the pendency of the proceeding since 19.11.2010, no counter affidavit is forthcoming, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition with a liberty to the petitioner to file a comprehensive application under the provisions of Section 3 of ‘the Act’, before the Collector under the Act giving the details of encroachment as also the details of the encroachers. Needless to add that any such application being filed on behalf of the petitioner, shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law by the Collector under the Act after giving due opportunity of hearing to all the affected parties. Bibhash (Jyoti Saran, J.)