Patna High Court
Mohammad Jalaluddin vs The State Of Bihar on 14 December, 2023
Author: Purnendu Singh
Bench: Purnendu Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10522 of 2023
======================================================
Mohammad Jalaluddin son of Iftakhar Hussain, resident of Salapatganj, Gudri
Bazar, Chapra, P.S.-Bhagwan Bazar, District-Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Urban Development and
Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. District Magistrate, Saran.
4. Superintendent of Police, Saran.
5. Chhapra Municipal Corporation Saran, through Municipal Commissioner,
Chhapra Municipal Corporation, Saran.
6. Municipal Commissioner, Chhapra Municipal Corporation, Chhapra, Saran.
7. Deputy Municipal Commissioner, Chhapra Municipal Corporation, Chhapra,
Saran.
8. Station House Officer, Bhagwan Bazar Police Station, Chhapra, Saran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Abbas Haider (SC 6)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 14-12-2023
Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Abbas Haider,
learned SC 6 for the State.
2. Petitioner has claimed for following relief(s) in
paragraph no.1 of writ petition : -
"(i) Issuance of a direction, order or writ
including writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the
letter contained under Memo No. 1240, dated
22/05/2023
, issued by the Municipal Commissioner,
Municipal Corporation, Chhapra (Respondent no. 6),
whereby the concerned respondent authority has
Patna High Court CWJC No.10522 of 2023 dt.14-12-2023
directed the petitioner to remove his finished structure
from the Khesra No. 112, Holding No. 692/712 in the
Ward No. 27, Circle No. 23 appertaining an area of 2
Kattha 19 Dhur situated at Salapatganj, Gudri Bazar,
Chhapra, P.S. Bhagwan Bazar, District - Saran, within 7
days of receiving of the said letter;
(ii) Issuance of a direction, order or writ
including writ in the nature of mandamus commanding
the concerned respondent authorities under the
Municipal Corporation, Chhapra, Saran, not to disturb
the petitioner from his peaceful possession over the land
having Khesra No. 112, Holding No. 692/712 in the
Ward No. 27, Circle No. 23 appertaining an area of 2
Kattha 19 Dhur situated at Salapatganj, Gudri Bazar,
Chhapra, P.S. Bhagwan Bazar, District Saran, as the
same is owned and possessed by the petitioner;
(iii) Issuance of a direction, order or writ
including writ in the nature of mandamus restraining the
concerned respondent authorities from taking any
coercive steps in pursuant to said letter dated
22/05/2023, contained under Memo No. 1240, against
the legal and peaceful possession of the petitioner over
the aforesaid land;
(iv)Any other relief/reliefs that the petitioner
may be found to be entitled to in the facts and
circumstances of the present case."
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submitted that the Municipal Commissioner without authority of
law has proceeded to demolish the thatched construction in the
garb of the order passed in CWJC No.20502 of 2021 even no
encroachment has been made by the petitioner. The thatched
construction was on the own plot of the petitioner but the same has
been demolished without authority of law, as such the petitioner is
entitled for compensation.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10522 of 2023 dt.14-12-2023
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Chhapra
Municipal Corporation submitted that considering the reliefs as
sought for in the present writ petition and taking into account the
judgment and the decree of the learned district courts passed in
Title Appeal No.90/1991, which got affirmed in Second Appeal
No.328 of 1993 dated 15.03.2000 in respect of title of the
petitioner over Khesra No.112, Municipal Holding No.692/712,
total area 2 katha and 19 dhur situated in Ward No.27, Circle
No.23, Salapatganj, Gudri Bazar, Chhapra, P.S Bhagwan Bazar,
District Saran, the alleged encroachment was found beyond the
boundary of the said plot. He submitted that after verifying the
demolition of thatched construction, it was found the same was not
constructed on Khesra No.112, Holding No.692/712 situated in
Ward No.27, Circle No.23. As such, the petitioner is not entitled
for any compensation. The Nagar Nigam has not violated the
direction passed in CWJC No.20502 of 2021.
5. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, the judgment and the decree
passed in Title Appeal No.90/1991, the subject matter of the said
title suit was Khesra No.112, Holding No.692/712 in Ward No.27,
Circle No.23 with respect to an area measuring 2 katha and 19
dhur with respect to which one Babu Gulab Chand Sah had
Patna High Court CWJC No.10522 of 2023 dt.14-12-2023
executed two 'sada hukumnama' in proof of the alleged settlement
- one 'hukumnama' was with regard to 1 katha and 10 dhur land
executed on 15th Jaith 1328 'Fasli' and another 'hukumnama' was
with regard to 1 katha and 9 dhur of land executed on 30 th Jaith
1328 Fasli. Paragraph no.32 of the judgment dated 3rd June, 1993
is re-produced herein below as under:
"On the consideration of the entire evidence,
as adduced by the plaintiffs as well as the defendants as
referred above, it has been fully proved that the suit
property remained in possession of the plaintiffs, and
their ancestors since 'Jaith 1328 Fasli'. The plaintiffs
have been coming in its possession for a period of more
than several 12 years. The defendants had the knowledge
of the possession of the plaintiffs over the suit property
and these plaintiffs remained in possession of the suit
property in exercise of their right, claiming the suit
property as belonging to them. Thus, the plaintiffs by
their consistent and up-interrupted possession over the
suit property, for a period of several 12 years, adverse to
the defendants, have acquired valid title to the suit
property on the basis of their adverse possession. Neither
the defendant no.1 nor the defendant no.2 was ever in
possession of the suit property. They have got no title to
the suit property, and, thus, these defendants have got no
title to the suit property, and, they have also not been in
possession of the suit property. All these points are thus
disposed of accordingly.
6. The the judgment dated 03.06.1993 passed in Title
Appeal No.90/1991 was affirmed by Hon'ble High Court in
Second Appeal No.328 of 1993, vide order dated 15.03.2000.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10522 of 2023 dt.14-12-2023
7. This Court finds that the disputed question of facts
don't call for judicial review. The petitioner may avail appropriate
remedy for claiming compensation in accordance with law.
8. So far as dispute relating to entitlement of the
municipal authorities over the land is concerned, the judgment
passed in Title Appeal No.90/1991 is in favour of the petitioner.
The municipal authorities can not proceed to demolish any portion
of the existing structure on the piece of land, which was the
subject matter of Title Appeal No.90/1991.
9. With the above observation/direction, the present writ
petition stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 20.12.2023
Transmission Date NA
