IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.829 of 2009 ---- Sanjay Kumar son of Late Narain Mahto, resident of Mohalla- Ramchandra pur, Bharaw per, Town Biharsharif, P.S.- Laheri, District-Nalanda. --Appellant. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Collector Nalanda at Biharsharif. 2. The Sub-Divisional Officer Biharsharif, Nalanda. 3. The Circle Officer, Biharsharif, Nalanda. 4. The Superintendent of Police Nalanda at Biharsharif. 5. The Executive Officer, Bihar Nagar Parishad Bihar Sharif, Nalanda. ----- For the appellant : Mr. Ram Suresh Rai, Senior Advocate Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Yogendra Pd. Sinha, Additional Advocate General-5 Mr. Rakesh Ambastha, Assistant Counsel to Additional Advocate General-5. ----- 04. 22/01/2010 In this intra-court appeal, the attack is to the order dated 12.02.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.2077 of 2009, wherein the present appellant had prayed for issue of a writ of mandamus to restore the peaceful physical possession of certain land and to pay compensation on the ground that he has right, title and interest over the said land and the State Government has no right whatsoever. Various aspects were pleaded to highlight how the right rests with the appellant. The claim for settlement and alternatively adverse possession was - 2 - also advanced. The learned Single Judge, after adverting to the facts, expressed the view that it is the civil court which can deal with the right, title, interest and possession of the parties. In our considered opinion, the view expressed by the learned Single Judge is absolutely justified and does not warrant any interference in this appeal. 2. In view of the aforesaid, while declining to interfere with the impugned order, liberty is granted to the appellant to initiate appropriate civil action, as advised in law. The civil court, after being satisfied with regard to tenability of the suit, shall decide the same as expeditiously as possible. 3. Needless to emphasise, the civil court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made by the learned Single Judge and also not be influenced by our non-interference in the order impugned. 4. With the aforesaid observation, the appeal stands disposed of. No costs. Sunil (Dipak Misra, CJ.) (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)