MURLIDHARAGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard order counsel for the petitioner as also learned Government Pleader No. II.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that though in an earlier proceeding an order had been passed, a copy of which is Annexure-6, that no encroachment had been done by construction of the house over plot No. 51 and the house is located only on plot No. 47, which is not said to be a public land, the notices as contained in Annexure-1 series had been issued purporting to be issued under Section 6(e) of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956, asking the petitioner to remove the encroachment by 21.10.1995. He contends that notice itself is dated 20.10.1995 and the direction for removing the encroachment on by from 21.10.1995 is itself arbitrary. He further submits that respondents have started demolition on 22.10.1995, though the petitioner is intending to prefer an appeal. As has been provided by the Statute. His further submission is that the prayer made by the petitioher in the show cause for getting the land containing house measured has not been considered.

(3.) Learned Government Pleader No. II fairly submits that the time of only one day that has been allowed by the notices for removal of encroachment is inadequate, but he submits that the petitioner may file statutory appeal before the Collector and seek appropriate remedy before the Collector. In reply learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has not been furnished a copy of the order of demolition.