IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5967 of 2006 RAM NARAYAN PRASAD RAMAN, SON OF LATE HUKUM CHAND SHAH, AT PRESENT RESIDENT AT+P.O.+P.S. BAJAPATTI, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI :--- PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SITAMARHI. 3. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PUPRI, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI. 4. CIRCLE OFFICER, BAJAPATTI, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI. :--- RESPONDENT 1ST SET. 5. MD. MODASSIR, SON OF LATE SAMSUL HAQUE, MUKHIYA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MADHUBAN GOTE, P.S. BAJAPATTI, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI. 6. MD. AKBAR, SON OF LATE SAMSUL HAQUE, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MADHUBAN GOTE, P.S.- BAJPATTI, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI. 7. MD. ASHIQUE, SON OF LATE JAINUL SHAH. 8. MD. JUBAIR, SON OF LATE MD. INSHAD, SL NO. 7 AND 8, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MADHUBAN GOT, P.S. BAJPATTI, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI. 9. MD. JAMSHAID, SON OF NATHUNI, 10. ABDUL KARIM, SON OF LATE MD. INUSH NADAF, SL. NO. 9 AND 10 RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- HARPURVA, P.S. BAJAPATTI, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI. 11. BINDESHWAR SAH, SON OF LATE LAXMI SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MADHUBAN BAZAR, P.S. BAJAPATTI, DISTRICT- SITAMARHI :---RESPONDENTS 2ND SET :---RESPONDENTS. ----------- 3. 30.03.2011. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the State-respondents for ensuring removal of the encroachment made by Private Respondent Nos. 5-11 from the lands bearing Plot No. 15122 which has been described in the continuous khatiyan as road measuring an area of 0.44.178 Acre decimals/hectare. Photo copy of the khatiyan is at page-19 of the brief. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner 2 that during the revisional survey operation adjoining lands of the petitioner was incorrectly recorded and he had to file civil suit for correction of the revenue record vide Title Suit No. 04/2006 which was decreed ex parte under orders dated 10.10.2007, Annexure-5. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that order dated 10.10.2007 has been passed after appreciating the cadastral survey record of rights and the map as also the record of rights/map drawn/prepared during revisional survey, the error in the revisional survey record of rights was obvious which was also confirmed by the Advocate Commissioner. In the background of aforesaid facts it is submitted that notwithstanding the findings recorded in the ex parte judgment dated 10.10.2007 petitioner can establish that he has not encroached any portion of the road bearing Plot No. 15122. 4. Having heard counsel for the parties, I direct the petitioner to produce the cadastral/revisional survey record of rights/map of the lands-in-question, whereafter the Circle Officer , Bajpatti should first decide whether petitioner is an encroacher of Plot No. 15122 with reference to the cadastral, revisional survey record of rights and the map, bereft of the findings recorded in the ex parte order. After the Circle Officer is satisfied that petitioner is not an encroacher of the road- land bearing Plot No. 15122, he should issue notice to 3 the other encroachers and pass appropriate order in the matter after hearing them in accordance with law. Necessary compliance of this order be made as early as possible, in any case within a period of two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)