SURENDRA PRATAP SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CALLING it in public interest, four petitioners, residents of village Sikhtti, P.S. Sanjhauli in the district of Rohtas have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking this Court's interference in removing some alleged encroachments from certain plots. It is stated that Plot Nos. 311, 317, 377, 407, 408 and 410 were part of an irrigation canal and certain villagers (not impleaded as party respondents in the writ petition) had unauthorisedly encroached upon those plots of land with the result that the irrigation canal had choked up.

(2.) ON hearing counsel for the petitioners and on going through the writ petition, we are satisfied that this is no cause in which the High Court should exercise its prerogative writ jurisdiction in public interest. More than one adequate remedy is available to the petitioners. They can either move the revenue/irrigation authorities for having the canal cleared or they can institute proceedings under Section 3 of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act after impleading the alleged offenders as party to the proceedings.