IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6868 of 2002 AWADHESH KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE RAM KINKAR PRASAD SINGH, ANANDPURI BELBANWA, MOTIHARI Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SDM, SADAR MOTIHARI 3. ANCHAL ADHIKARI, MOTIHARI 4. OFFICER IN CHARGE, MOTIHARI TOWN POLICE STATION 5. YOGENDRA PRASAD SINGH, ANAND PURI, BELBANWA, MOTIHARI. ----------- 4 19.11.2009. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner prays for time. On perusal of records, it appears that vide order dated 25.7.2002 notice was issued to respondent no. 5 and State counsel had been directed to file a counter affidavit, whereas till further orders, the operation of impugned order was stayed. This Court under the aforesaid order further observed that this interim order passed behind the back of the respondents is subject to the condition that in case writ petition fails, the Court may consider recompensing the concerned respondents suitably at the expense of the petitioner. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner prays for quashing office order contained in Memo no.321 dated 14.5.2002, issued by the SDM, Sadar Motihari, respondent no. 2 deputing Anchal Adhikari Sadar Motihari, respondent no. 3 as Magistrate to keep vigilance and ensure peace by being present at the time of construction of extension of house of respondent no. 5. The petitioner states that he purchased land appertaining to Khata no. 55 plot no. 41 measuring 2 kathas, 5.5. dhurs in the name of his wife vide a registered sale deed in the year 1981. Subsequently, he purchased 1 katha of land of the same Khata and plot in his own name in - 2 - the year 1997. The petitioner amalgamated both the land and constructed a residential building after due sanction of plan by Motihari Municipality. He further submits that in order to have a passage to reach the main road of the mohalla, the petitioner purchased a piece of land (area 5.5 dhurs) measuring 8 feet 9 inch in width and 79 ft in length vide registered sale deed dated 16.3.1998. He further submits that respondent no. 5 purchased one katha of land which falls on the western side of the land/passage of the petitioner referred to above. Respondent no. 5 subsequently purchased 14 dhurs of land which falls on the eastern side of passage of the petitioner in the year 1997. The petitioner submits that earlier a proceeding under section 144 Cr.P.C. was initiated with respect to land of respondent no.5 falling on his (petitioner ) eastern side passage. The petitioner submits that order of the SDO is patently illegal. He submits that proceeding under section 144 Cr.P.C. culminated into 145 Cr.P.C. proceeding under order dated 22.10.2000. He further submits that he had filed Cr. Revision No. 23 of 2002 before the Sessions judge, East Champaran, Motihari which is pending. In counter affidavit filed by respondent no. 5 it has been stated that Khata no. 55, khesra no. 36 bearing one Katha was purchased in favour of his wife, namely, Draupadi Devi on 3.8.1985 from one Habibur Rahman s/o late Abdul Rahman. He further submits that said Habibur Rahman executed sale deed with respect to land being Khata no. 55, Khesra no. 36 bearing 14 dhurs of land in favour of Md. Ainul Haque on 11.4.1985. One Ajijur Rahman and Rafique Rahman s/o Ainul Haque, Nurun Nema d/o Ainul Haque executed sale deed in favour of wife of - 3 - respondent no.5. The matter involves numerous facts pleaded by both the sides. In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to redress his grievance in any other proceeding including filing of suit. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)