IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7084 of 2002 BRAHMDEO JHA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 7. 18.4.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. No one appears on behalf of respondent no.5. Rightly or wrongly the alleged encroachment of the petitioner has been removed. The petitioner alleges that such encroachment was removed illegally at the instance of respondent no.5 who somehow misled this Court and took the Circle Officer into collusion. Counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that there are two suits pending over the land, one between the petitioner and respondent no.5 and the other between the petitioner and the State of Bihar being Title Partition Suit No. 28/1996 and Title Suit no. 20/1999 and therefore, if the question of title and the ownership of the petitioner over the land in question has to be gone into, any finding or observation pursuant to the order of this Court may prejudice the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court such 2 apprehension of the petitioner may have some justification. Therefore, in order to protect the right of the petitioner agitating his claim before the Civil Court, this Court must clarify that whatever order has been passed by the authority under the Public Land Encroachment Act or has been sought to be implemented by this Court will not stand in the way of the petitioner for getting his rights with regard to the said land determined in accordance with law. This application, accordingly, stands disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/