Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
I.A. ANSARI & CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH, JJ
Pawan Kumar – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Revenue and Land Reforms & Ors. – Respondent
CWJC No.17103 of 2014
Decided on : 08-09-2015
Public Interest Litigation - Land Encroachment - The court dismissed the writ application filed as a Public Interest Litigation, stating that it involved the individual interest of the petitioner and could be remedied by taking recourse to the provision of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner purchased a plot of land and filed a petition seeking recourse to the provisions of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in order to remove alleged encroachment or obstruction from the pathway leading to his land.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the application could not be treated as a Public Interest Litigation and that the petitioner's grievance could be remedied by taking recourse to the provision of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The court dismissed the proceeding as wholly misconceived.
Issues: The issue was whether the writ application could be treated as a Public Interest Litigation or if the petitioner's grievance could be remedied through Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the application involved the individual interest of the petitioner and could be remedied by taking recourse to the specific provision of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and therefore could not be treated as a Public Interest Litigation.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the proceeding as wholly misconceived.
None has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. However, Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, learned Government Advocate No.9, appears for the State and we have heard him.
2. From this writ application, made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which has been filed in the form of Public Interest Litigation, it transpires that the petitioner has purchased a plot of land. The petitioner has filed a petition before the respondent No.4, namely, Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Muzaffarpur, seeking recourse to the provisions of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in order to get removed the alleged encroachment or obstruction from the pathway leading to his land.
3. From the narration of facts in the present petition and the materials on record, it clearly transpires that this application cannot be treated as a Public Interest Litigation, as this application involves individual interest of the petitioner and his grievance that the pathway to his land has been encroached or obstructed upon, can be remedied by taking recourse to the provision of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
4. Situated thus, it is clear that the present proceeding is wholly misconceived and stands, therefore, dismissed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
