M.KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, J. - (1.) OMIYA Kumar Maji and Manoj Kumar Tiwary, claiming themselves to be the local residents of the area, have filed this writ petition seeking for a mandamus directing the respondent authorities not to obstruct the public movement and to use the PCC public road by the residents, by constructing the boundary wall in this public road.
(2.) THE contention in brief urged by the counsel for the petitioner in support of the said prayer could be summarized as follows: The petitioners are the local residents of Mohalla -Grant Estate, Dumka. Within the ward No. 16 and behind the Civil Surgeon's quarters, Mohalla Grant Estate is situated in plot No. 1997 of the Dumka Town. Contiguous to plot No. 1997 is plot No. 1996 having an area of 27 bighas, out of which 22 bighas were given to Health Department. Mohalla Grant Estate is in existence since British time. There are 30 -40 tribal families staying there. All the local residents of the said Mohalla are to reach to the Bus Stand, Main Road and State Highway only through the passage on plot No. 1996. This plot No. 1996 has been used by the local people without any interruption and as such, they acquired prescriptive right as well as easementary right over the said passage. Suddenly the construction of boundary wall is proposed to be made in plot No. 1996 near the residence of the Civil Surgeon obstructing the public road. Therefore, the petitioners, as the representatives of the village, made representation to the Deputy Commissioner, Dumka, requesting not to obstruct the public road by constructing the compound boundary wall. However, the construction work began. In spite of the people's objection, the construction work is going on. Since the construction of the boundary wall over the public road so as to obstruct the free movement of the villagers over the PCC public road, is illegal and unconstitutional, the petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking writ of mandamus. In reply to the above contentions, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have filed counter. Similarly, respondent Nos. 3 and 4 have also filed their counter objecting to the prayer of the petitioners. The crux of the submissions made by the counsel for the respondents is as follows: The plot No. 1996, an area of 27 Bighas 5 Kathas 3 Dhurs, is situated within Khata No. 32/7 of Naya Dumka No. 7 of Dumka Town, which is recorded as Civil Surgeon Quartrs -cum -Sahan in Khesra Register of Dumka Anchal, which is Government land. Since there was attempt to make encroachment and also with a view to providing security to the Civil Surgeon and other Medical Officers whose quarters are situated in this area, compound boundary wall has become a necessity. As a matter of fact, this Government land does not obstruct the residents of the village from going to the Bus Stand, Main Road and Dumka Rampurhat Road. The public street already available to them for going to Main Road is Grant Amit Ambar Kachhap Versus Union Of India Estate Road. Therefore, it cannot be contended that the compound boundary wall has been constructed over the public road. On the other hand, the records produced before this Court would indicate that it is a Government land. Therefore, the prayer is misconceived.
(3.) WE have carefully considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and have given our anxious consideration to the respective contentions.;