D.N.PATELM, J. - (1.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is claiming ownership upon the properties, which are referred at Annexure 1/A to the memo of present petition. There are several Plots upon which the Petitioner is claiming ownership and title on the basis of various documents and it is submitted that a Public Interest Litigation was preferred by some persons and a Writ Petition bearing W.P.(PIL) No. 2561 of 2007 was instituted before this Court for removal of the encroachments upon the properties, upon which the Petitioner is claiming ownership and the following Order was passed in the said Public Interest Litigation, by this Court: "In view of the fact that the Deputy Commissioner has filed affidavit mentioning the steps taken, we do not find any reason to keep this PIL pending. The Deputy Commissioner is directed to continue the steps undertaken by taking action and pass Orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. With this direction, this PIL is disposed of. Let copies of this Order be given to the counsel appearing for the parties."
(2.) THE aforesaid Order was passed on 10th January, 2008. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that thereafter, a direction has also been given by the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, for removal of the encroachment with the help of the Police force, but, the Petitioner is residing on the properties, which are narrated at Annexure 1/A to the memo of present petition, as the owner of the properties and, therefore, a detailed representation dated 27th June, 2008 has been filed, which is at Annexure 4 to the memo of present petition, and it is submitted that without deciding the said representation, the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, cannot remove the Petitioner, as the Petitioner is not an encroacher at all. It is further submitted that under the excuse of removal of encroachment, the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, may not remove even the owners of the properties and, therefore, this Petitioner has been preferred, with a prayer that let the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, decide the claim of the present Petitioner upon the properties, narrated at Annexure 1/A to the memo of present Petitioner and, thereafter, action may be initiated, in accordance with law, rules, regulations, policies and the government enforceable Orders, applicable in the facts of the present. I have heard learned Counsel for the State Mr. Lai, who has submitted that the Respondents are duty bound to remove the encroachment, as per the Order of this Court. Nonetheless, if the Petitioner is claiming title and ownership upon the properties, as stated hereinabove, the representation of the Petitioner at Annexure 4 to the memo of present petition dated 27th June, 2008 will be decided by the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, in accordance with law, rules, regulations, policies and the government enforceable Orders, applicable in the facts of the present. It is also submitted by the learned Counsel Mr. Lal that the contentions raised in the memo of present petition are not accepted by the Respondents and they are denied in totality.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel Mr. Lal on behalf of the State submitted that as expeditiously as possible, the Deputy Commissioner, Dhabnad, will decide the claim of the present Petitioner, upon the properties, narrated at Annexure 1/A to the memo of present petition.;