IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17105 of 2009 1. RUPESH KUMAR S/O RAJENDRA PRASAD SINGH, R/O VILL- PARGHARI, P.O- BAMDEO, P.S- RAJOUN, DISTT- BANKA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COLLECTOR, BANKA, DISTT- BANKA 3. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, RAJOUN, P.S- RAJOUN, DISTT- BANKA 4. NARAYAN SINGH S/O SARAB LAL SINGH R/O VILL- PARGHARI , P.S- RAJOUN, P.O- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA 5. UMESH SINGH S/O SAHDEO SINGH R/O VILL-PARGHARI, P.S- RAJOUN, PO- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA 6. JANARDAN SINGH, S/O SANTU SINGH R/O VILL- PARGHARI, P.S- RAJOUN, P.O- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA 7. ANIL SINGH S/O SAHDEO SINGH R/O VILL- PARGHARI, P.S- RAJOUN, P.O- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA 8. DILIP SINGH S/O SAHDEO SINGH R/O VILL- PARGHARI, P.S- RAJOUN, P.O- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA 9. LAKHAN YADAV, S/O KESHO YADAV, R/O VILL- PARGHARI, P.S- RAJOUN, P.O- BAMDEO, DISTT- BANKA ----------- 2. 14.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The grievance of the petitioner is that notwithstanding the report of Anchal Amin dated 5.10.2007 with regard to an encroachment on a public road by certain person on lands of Khata No. 308, Plot No. 504 having an area of 49 decimals in village Parghari, Thana No. 600, P.S. Rajoun, District- Banka, no action was being taken by the respondent authorities to remove the encroachment. This Court is disturbed by the manner in which citizens have to approach the Court seeking a direction against the State officials for performing of what are otherwise normal executive duties. If the 2 petitioner had only alleged encroachment and enquiry was required, matters may have been different. But if what the petitioner contends is correct and the Anchal Amin has submitted a report, surely the report was not meant to be locked up in the cupboard but was required to be acted upon by the District administration without waiting for direction of the Court. Let the District Magistrate examine issues and ensure that the majesty of the law is upheld and, if satisfied direct proceedings under the Land Encroachment Act before the appropriate authority and concluded by taking the same to its logical conclusion within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before him. Needless to state that any such proceeding has to be after hearing all concerned including those who may be affected by any such order. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)