Sanjeev Kumar vs The Union Of India
2023 Latest Caselaw 5091 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12724 of 2023
     ======================================================

Sanjeev Kumar, Son of Rajnandan Singh, Resident of Durga Ashram Gali, Sheikhpura, Police Station-Hawai Adda, District-Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The Union of India through Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt.

of India, New Delhi.

2. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Irrigation Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The District Magistrate, Patna.

4. The Executive Engineer, Sone Canal Division, Khagaul, Irrigation Department, Patna.

5. The Circle Officer, Phulwarisharif, Patna.

6. The Circle Officer, Sampat Chak, Patna.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. J.P. Singh, Advocate Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate Mr. Arvind Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Dr. K.N. Singh, Additional Solicitor General Mr. Amish Kumar, A.C. to AG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 05-10-2023

Vide judgment dated 05.09.2023 the matter was

dismissed. However, it appears that inadvertently a different

judgment was typed, which needs to be recalled. As such, we

recall the judgment dated 05.09.2023 and pass the following

judgment:-

2. In the present case, the petitioner has sought for

removal of encroachment from the Canal Dariyapur-Rajwaha Patna High Court CWJC No.12724 of 2023 dt.05-10-2023

situated within Phulwarisharif and Sampat Chak Block, District-

Patna by initiating a proceeding under Section 3 of the Bihar

Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956. It is not clear as to why

the petitioner himself did not approach the authority under the

Act for removal of such encroachment. Further, it has to be

noticed that the alleged encroacher has not been impleaded in

the above writ petition. In any event, we are of the opinion that

a Public Interest Litigation would not be maintainable for the

reliefs prayed.

3. The writ petition would stand dismissed leaving

liberty to the petitioner to approach the authority under the

Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956, but without

expressing anything on the locus standi of the petitioner or the

merits of the matter; which has to be considered by the

appropriate authority.

(K. Vinod Chandran, CJ)

(Partha Sarthy, J) P.K.P./-

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date          07.10.2023
Transmission Date