IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.783 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6818 of 2015 ====================================================== Jitan Singh Son of Sri Kamla Prasad Singh Resident of Village- Kuchila, Post-Kuchila, District-Rohtas of Sasaram. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Animesh Kumar Parasar, the District Magistrate, Rohtas of Sasaram. 3. Santosh Kumar the Circle Officer Kochas, Rohtas of Sasaram. 4. Bhim Prasad Singh Son of Late Radha Prasad Singh Resident of Village- Parasiya, P.S.-Kuchila, Post-Kuchila, District-Rohtas of Sasaram. 5. Ram Jee Raj Bhar, Son of Gouri Raj BHar Resident of Village-Parasiya, P.S.-Kuchila, Post-Kuchila, District-Rohtas of Sasaram. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dharmendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Khurshid Alam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 5 18-08-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The present contempt petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for initiating contempt proceedings against the opposite parties for willful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 08.09.2017 passed in CWJC No. 6818 of 2015, whereby the respondents were directed to proceed with the encroachment proceeding concerning the petitioner in accordance with law. Patna High Court MJC No.783 of 2018(5) dt.18-08-2026 2/2 3. A show-cause has been filed on behalf of the State, stating therein that, pursuant to the order dated 08.09.2017 passed by the writ Court in CWJC No. 6818 of 2015, the Circle Officer, Kochas, Rohtas at Sasaram (opposite party no. 3), has passed an order dated 07.04.2018 in Land Encroachment Case No. 13 of 2017-18. 4. In view of the aforesaid facts, it appears that the order of the writ Court has been complied with and nothing further remains to be adjudicated in the present contempt proceeding. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 07.04.2018 passed in Land Encroachment Case No. 13 of 2017-18, he may avail the appropriate remedy before the competent appellate authority, in accordance with law. 5. Accordingly, the present contempt petition stands disposed of. The petitioner shall be at liberty to avail the appropriate remedy in accordance with law. Jyoti/- (Praveen Kumar, J) U T