IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2793 of 2011 Drigonmeshwar son of late Sita Ram, Resident of Harding Road Kranti Marg P.O.-G.P.O. town and District Patna………………………………………………..…Petitioner in person Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, Collector Patna. 3. Sri Sudhir Kumar, Secretary, Building Construction Dept Office at Bailey Road Vishweshwaraiya Bhawan, Patna………..Opposite parties. ----------- 02/ 20.07.2011 The petitioner is appearing in person. He submits that earlier he had filed C.W.J.C. No.11804 of 2008 for directing the respondents, namely the State of Bihar and its authorities to abide by the judgment and decree dated 26.08.1996 passed by Subordinate Judge-I, Patna in Title Suit No.36 of 1994 between Goverdhan Lal Pujari and the State of Bihar and also for directing the respondents to hand over the possession with cost of C.S. Plot No.1195 and 1196 appertaining to Khata No.60, Tauzi No. 5140 measuring an area of 13 decimals land of Thana No.16, P.S. – Sachiwalya in the city of Patna. 2. It transpires that the case has a long and chequered history and both the parties were heard in detail and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the executing court, namely Subordinate Judge-I, Patna to implead the petitioner, namely Drigonmeshwar as a party to Execution Case No.19 of 2008 and if the decree of the trial court was to be executed it should be executed in favour of both the brothers, namely Goverdhan Lal Pujari and Drigonmeshwar as per the decree of the partition suit, if no objection - 2 - was raised by the petitioner’ brother, namely Goverdhan Lal Pujari. 3. The petitioner further submits that as per the direction of this court he was duly impleaded in the execution case and the executing court issued joint writ of delivery of possession in favour of both the brothers according to which Nazir along with other staffs went for effecting the delivery of possession, but they could not effect delivery of possession as more than two dozens of policemen were already there due to which delivery of possession could not be effected. He further states that the police were placed there on the directions of Mr. Ramai Ram, a Minister in the State Cabinet as according the petitioner he is interested in the land at the instance of the judgment debtor, namely the State of Bihar. Now the petitioner wants action to be taken against the State of Bihar and its authorities for placing police force to deprive the petitioner from the fruit of his decree and the result of the execution case. 4. I am afraid, this matter cannot be decided in this M.J.C. petition which is only with respect to initiation of a proceeding of contempt as the earlier order of this court with regard to the impleadment of the petitioner and proceeding with the execution case having already been complied by the execution court. In the said circumstances, this M.J.C. petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a writ petition for deciding his grievances against the authorities of the State. Harish (S.N.Hussain, J.)