Jurisdictional issues in encroachment appeals under local land law.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

2 02-12-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The challenge in the writ petition is made to the order dated 23.06.2025, passed by the learned Collector-cum- District Magistrate, East Champaran in Encroachment Appeal Case No. 59/2024-25, whereby the learned Collector-cum- District Magistrate, East Champaran dismissed the encroachment appeal of the petitioner and directed the authorities to remove the encroachment of the land, in question.

3. Mr. Y. C. Verma, learned Senior Advocate representing the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order is wholly without jurisdiction and in complete defiance of the prescriptions of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act , 1956, inasmuch as, the land on which buildings have been erected was settled in favour of the petitioner long back and this fact has not been looked into.

4. An interlocutory application, bearing I.A. No. 1 of

2025, has also been filed in view of the apprehension of demolishing the building, in question, in pursuant to the impugned order and a consequential letter, bearing no. 1730 dated 21.11.2025, whereby the Circle Officer, Chakia requested the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chakia to provide police force and J.C.B. for removal of encroachment.

5. From the order impugned, prima facie, it appears that earlier the private respondent had filed an Encroachment Case No. 11/2016-17 and after hearing the parties vide order dated 17.03.2017, the petitioner was directed to remove the encroachment. The said order was also put to challenge in Appeal No. 42/2017-18, before the court of learned Collector, East Champaran, however the same also stood dismissed, but the aforenoted order have never been questioned. The entire case of the petitioner is based on settlement under Briksh Patta Yojna (Tree Lease Scheme) and thereupon the petitioner has been accorded the benefit of Indira Awas Yojna long back in the year 1995-96, under License No. 79, which does not, prima facie, allow the petitioner to make construction over the land.

6. Learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that the order of the learned Collector-cum-District Magistrate, East Champaran in Encroachment Appeal Case No. 59/2024-25 is explicitly clarified the entire position and no paper has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner as to under what basis she has been continuing in possession of the land, in question.

7. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner, at this juncture, prayed for a week accommodation to enable the petitioner to file substantive document in support of the case that she has been coming in rightful possession, based upon the rightful documents.

8. Considering the submissions, one week time is allowed to the petitioner to ensure filing of the supplementary affidavit bringing on record the necessary documents. 9. Suffice it to observe that in case the petitioner failed to bring all necessary relevant documents, based upon which she has been coming in possession, this Court would be constrained to pass the final order.

10. Let the matter be placed under the heading “For Orders” on 15.12.2025.

11. In the meantime, it is expected that the status quo ante shall be maintained.

(Harish Kumar, J)