SHARDA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the notice dtd. 3/4/2018, issued by the Circle Officer, Narkatiyaganj i.e. the respondent no. 6, whereby and whereunder the husband of the petitioner has been directed to remove the alleged encroachment made over the encroached road situated at Ward no. 23, Narkatiyaganj Nagar Parishad, West Champaran, Bettiah. It is also prayed to restrain the respondents from demolishing the construction erected by the petitioner on her private land.

(2.) The brief facts of the case according to the petitioner are that the petitioner is the owner of a piece of land situated at Tauzi no. 951, Khata no. 89, carved out of Plot no. 458, Ward no. 23, Narkatiyaganj Nagar Parishad, Narkatiyaganj, having a total area of 8 dhurs, which was purchased vide registered sale deed dtd. 4/2/1980, whereafter, the petitioner got her name mutated in the records of the Circle Office, Narkatiyaganj as well as in the records of the Nagar Parishad, Narkatiyaganj and then she had constructed her house over the said land in the year 1987 and left 03 feet wide land adjacent to her gate towards road for entrance and for enabling her four-wheeler vehicle to enter her house, apart from leaving 02 feet wide strip of land in front of her house for the purposes of construction of drain etc. It is the further case of the petitioner that suddenly her husband came to know that a notice dtd. 3/8/2011 has been issued by the authorities of the respondent-Board in connection with Encroachment case no. 16 of 2008-09, whereby he was asked to file his reply by 17/9/2011. The husband of the petitioner is stated to have inquired about the said notice, whereupon he came to know that the said case has been instituted wrongly in his name, whereafter an inquiry was held by the Circle Amin and it was found that encroachment has been made by one other person namely Kudeshwar Sharma. The husband of the petitioner had then appeared before the respondent no. 6 and filed his reply, nonetheless, he was served with the aforesaid impugned notice dtd. 3/4/2018, whereby and whereunder, in the garb of some order having been passed by the Hon'ble High Court, in a writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. no. 24310 of 2013, the husband of the petitioner has been directed to remove the encroachment in question by 19/4/2018, situated over Khata no. 89, Khesra no. 458.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as far as the aforesaid writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. no. 24310 of 2013 is concerned, a co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dtd. 23/6/2017 had granted liberty to the petitioner of that case to file appropriate representation before the respondent no. 4, whereupon the respondent authorities were directed to implement the order dtd. 2/1/2012, passed in Encroachment case no. 16 of 2008-09, in accordance with the provisions of the Act, after giving due opportunity of being heard to the affected persons, in case the said order dtd. 2/1/2012 has not been either challenged or modified or quashed by any authority or court. It is further submitted by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not made any encroachment and moreover, neither the petitioner nor her husband have ever been given any opportunity of hearing in compliance of the aforesaid order dtd. 23/6/2017, passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C. no. 24310 of 2013, prior to issuance of the aforesaid notice dtd. 3/4/2018, hence the said notice dtd. 3/4/2018 is fit to be quashed. It is also submitted that merely on the basis of some illegal report of Anchal Amin dtd. 5/5/2009, the respondent no. 6 has illegally found that the petitioner has made encroachments.