IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.938 of 2009 1. KAMDEO MAHTO son of Sri Harihar Prasad Mahton 2. Subhash Kumar Mahton @ Subhash Kumar son of Sri Nirmal Kishore Mahto, both residents of village Baniyapatti, P.O. Bithauli, P.S. S.K. Nagar, Distt- Purnea ........... appellants Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Collector, Purnea 3. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Purnea 4. The Executive Magistrate, Sadar, Purnea 5. The Anchaladhikari, K. Nagar, Purnea 6. The Superintendent of Police, Purnea 7. The Officer-in-Charge, K. Nagar Police Station, Purnea.......respondents ----------- 5 11-02-2010 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the State. The judgement and order under appeal passed by the writ court shows that the writ petition has been dismissed because the alleged encroachers said to be about 80 in number were not made parties to the writ petition and it was further held that writ jurisdiction cannot be exercised so as to execute an order u/s 145 of Code of Criminal Procedure passed in favour of the writ petitioners in the year 2004. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that this court in several judgements recognized duty of the State to ensure that right of property of the citizens remains meaningful and judgements and decrees of the Civil Courts are 2 respected. There is no quarrel with the said proposition. In the present case there is neither any decree nor execution proceeding between the writ petitioners and alleged encroachers. In the facts of the case, we find no good reason to take a different view in the matter. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. The appellants shall have the liberty which has already been granted by the writ court. BKS/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (C. M. Prasad, J.)