AMITABH PANKAJ Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) Petitioner, an Advocate practicing in the Judgeship of Gumla, has preferred this Public Interest Litigation for removal of encroachment caused by the Respondent No. 5 on a public road / land as it causes inconvenience to the general public of the locality. He has also averred that though, he resides in the locality but he has no personal interest, direct or indirect, in the subject matter of Public Interest Litigation. The land over which encroachment is alleged is situate at Khata No. 429, Plot No. 676, Thana No. 59 of Mouza Gumla, having an area of 38 decimal said to be recorded as Gairmajarua Aam Land in the Record of Rights. Petitioner contends that the land has been used as a road by the people of locality which connects important places like Civil Court, S.D.O. Office, D.C. Office within the locality.

(3.) Earlier, vide order, dated 02.02.2017, notices were issued upon the Respondent State Officials as well as Respondent No. 5. State has appeared and filed a counter affidavit and thereafter a supplementary counter affidavit on 14.07.2017. The stand of the State, as contained in the counter affidavit, is to the effect that the public road has not been encroached and is being used by the public without any disturbance over an area of 0.10 ¼ acre out of total area of 0.38 acre. In reply to the averments made at para 7 of the writ petition, it is stated that the Respondent No. 5 has constructed a building over 0.20 acre of Gairmajarua land. It has been further stated that a pipeline has been installed just behind the building of Respondent No. 5. Further, a drain is existing on the other side of road from the building of Respondent No. 5 on the side of west and south. It is also their contention at para 19 that except the petitioner, nobody else has filed any objection. The Circle Officer, Gumla has issued a show-cause notice on Respondent No. 5 on complaints filed by the petitioner. In response to the statements made at para 16 of the writ petition, it is stated that the land has not been settled to the Respondent No. 5 as it is a Gairmajarua Aam Land.