The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of establishing the nature of the land as 'public land' under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956, before initiating encroachment proceedings. The judgment also emphasizes the limitations of summary proceedings in cases involving complicated issues of title and possession.

Re: C.W.J.C.No.906 of 2014 With I.A. No. 412 of 2014 With I.A. No.2014 of 2015

The writ petition initially questioned the notice dated 23.10.2013 issued by the respondent-Circle Officer, Patna Sadar in Land Encroachment Case No. 13 of 2012-13, a copy of which is placed at Annexure-7 to the writ petition whereby the petitioners were directed to remove encroachment from unsurveyed land lying adjacent to the river Ganges within 24 hours failing which the same would be removed. The petitioners also filed I.A.No.412 of 2014 praying for interim relief during the pendency of the writ petition even when the boundary wall of the petitioners had already been demolished by the respondent authorities on 21.12.2013 as stated by the petitioners in paragraph 15 of the writ petition. Under the orders of this Court a counter affidavit was filed by the District Magistrate, Patna Sadar placing on record the various orders passed by the Circle Officer in Encroachment proceedings whereunder the objections raised by the petitioners had been disposed of. The petitioner claiming that these orders were ante dated has sought permission to question the same by way of I.A.No.2014 of 2015.

2. Taking note of the circumstances that the orders placed on record by the District Magistrate vide Annexure-A to the supplementary counter affidavit and also impugned with I.A.No2014 of 2015 are foundation for the notice impugned in the writ petition, the prayer is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to question the same in the present proceedings.

3. Mr. Sanjay Singh has appeared for the petitioners and the State is represented by Mr. Ashok Kumar Choudhary learned AAG 13.

4. The matter in contest relates to a piece of land being Tauzi No.5070, Khesra No.3488 situated in Mauza Hamidpur Digha Diara, Thana No. 140 admeasuring 4 bighas and 4 kathas lying adjacent to Mohalla- Kurji, in the district of Patna. According to the petitioners, the said plot of land was in possession of the grand father of the petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 Sita Ram Raut since more than 50 years and after his demise was mutated in the name of the father of the petitioner No.2 to 5 namely, late Dwarika Rai. The petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 came in peaceful possession over the land after the death of the father Dwarika Rai. It is the case of the petitioners that the name of Dwarika Rai was mutated in the revenue records vide order passed on 25.7.1995 in Dakhil Kharij (Mutation) Case No. 283/1 of 1995-96 and a Jamabandi No.5070/3 was created.

5. According to Mr. Singh since the land in question was a part of Digha Diara area hence it was submerged in river Ganges in the year 1957 and has resurfaced in 1993 and thus was subjected to Alluvion and Diluvion characteristics. Learned counsel has referred to the order passed by the Circle Officer in the mutation case, a copy of which is placed at Annexure-1 to the writ petition. He submits that since after the order of mutation, rent receipts were issued, copies of which are placed at Annexure-1 series.

6. Learned counsel next referred to a judgment passed in Title Suit No.41 of 1996/6 of 2001 to support his contentions that the land is alluvion/diluvion in nature as well as to canvass that the right, title and interest of the petitioners over the land in question was tested in the suit filed by the father of the petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 who prayed for a declaration of his title and possession over the plot in question and when it was noticed by the trial court that a ‘Thak Bast Survey’ had taken place in relation to the Diara area as back as in 1842 and map and registers had been prepared containing the name of the persons in occupation of such land. He with reference to the facts discussed by the trial court at paragraphs 2 of the judgment and the findings recorded at paragraphs 7 to 10 of the judgment submits that the trial court on appreciation of the facts and evidence on record has confirmed the title of the father of the petitioners Nos. 2 to 5 over the la