- (1.)It has been alleged that the said opposite party demolished the petitioner's structure without following the procedure laid down under Section 59 of the Bihar State Housing Board Act. It is submitted that the said order was passed on 14.8.1997 and the said opposite parties had full-knowledge of the order which was handed-over to Respondent No. 2 on 5.7.1998. This order was duty acknowledged by the office, but in spite of receipt of the order, the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 got the petitioner's structure demolished in a gross violation of the order of this Court and they are liable to be punished for committing Contempt of this Court.
The opposite parties have denied the allegation and stated, inter alia, that they are law abiding persons and they have not disobeyed and violated the order of this Court. They have acted in accordance with the order passed in CWJC No. 2290 of 1990 [R]. The said order was passed in the P.I.L. and direction was issued to remove the encroachment from the land belonging to P.W.D. Road which was acquired for the purpose of widening of the Kandra-Adityapur Road. In compliance of the said order passed in CWJC No. 2290 of 1990[R], the administration through out the State removed the encroachment from the public land. The petitioner was also found occupying some portion of public land. Encroached area was measured and marked in presence of the petitioner. Notice was also issued vide Letter No. 420 dated 25.6.1998 and sufficient opportunity was given to the petitioner and other persons to remove their encroachment from the public land. When the encroachment was not removed, it was got removed by the P.W.D. Authorities. The opposite parties were deputed to assist the authorities of the P.W.D. in removing the encroachments..

(2.)It has been submitted that the opposite parties have not acted in violation of the order passed by this Court and has not committed Contempt of Court.
(3.)Mr. A.K. Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the statement made in the show cause reply is factually false and baseless. The opposite parties were in full-knowledge about the order of this Court, whereby the said authorities of the Housing Board were restrained from demolishing the structure without following the procedure, provided under Section 59 of the Act, but the opposite party in defiance of the said order deliberately and knowingly got the structure removed by usual force. In view of the said admitted position the said opposite parties have rendered themselves liable for suitable punishment for committing Contempt of this Court.