Advocates:
['Sheela Sharma', '', 'Rita Kumari', 'Shivendra Kumar Roy', 'SMRITI KUMARI SINGH', 'PRABHAKAR JHA-GP', '', 'Girijish Kumar']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4978 of 2017

======================================================

1.

Anjani Kumar Sinha and Ors Son of Late Awadh Prasad,

2.

Anup Kumar Sinha S/o Late Awadh Prasad

3.

Anuj Kumar Sinha S/o Late Awadh Prasad All resident of Road No.6A,

Rajendra Nagar, P.O.-Rajendra Nagar, P.S.-Kadamkuan, District-Patna,

Bihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar

2.

The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Education, Superintendent cum District Programme Convener,

Bihar, Education Project, P

4.

The Collector, Patna

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr.Sheela Sharma

For the Respondent/s

:

Mr.Prabhakar Jha-Gp27

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY

ORAL ORDER

6

29-04-2019

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

2. This is a case of telling a tale of the reluctance in

conducting the State cases.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn

attention to the Annexure-3 the judgment in Title Suit No. 39 of

2008. In that Title Suit the State of Bihar was a party. The

judgment was delivered on 25.7.2009. We are in 2019.

4. After the judgment and decree dated 25.7.2009, the

petitioner filed Execution Case No. 1 of 2011 contained in

Patna High Court CWJC No.4978 of 2017(6) dt.29-04-2019

2/3

Annexure-S/5.

5. From perusal of the order, it appears that scheme of

execution is the proceeding is continuing in most casual manner

and its appears that the execution proceeding in execution case

no. 1 of 2011 has not fructified as yet.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

respondent State would submit that after 10 years of the

judgment now the State wishes to prefer appeal.

7. The manner in which the judgment of the

competent civil court is neglected and execution is frustrated

would indicate that the authorities of the State are above the law

such conduct of respondents runs contrary to the concept of

rule of law. The individual howsoever high is not above the law.

It appears that for respondents the order of the Court is only

declaration by the Court but enforcement depends on the sweet

will of the officers. Time is ripe to introspect wheter State

authorities can frustrate the judgment rendered by the competent

court in the manner it is done in the present case.

8. The court does not approve the action of the State

in refusing to implement the judgment rendered by the

competent court in which the State was party.

9. The Court accordingly, directs the State authorities

Patna High Court CWJC No.4978 of 2017(6) dt.29-04-2019

3/3

to see that the judgment and decree in the Title suit is

implemented in its entirety within a period of 30 days after

general election or in the alternative pay compensation to the

petitioner for use of land of the petitioner in terms of 2013 Act

within a period of sixty days from today.

10. With the aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed and

disposed of.

Ravi/-

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J)

U