AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners with Mr. Anuj Kumar and Mr. Arun Kumar Bhagat, learned AC to AAG-12.
By way of this Public Interest Litigation the petitioner espouses the cause of the local residents of Mohalla Mahadeva falling within Thana No. 250, in the town and District of Siwan in so far as an exercise has been initiated by the district authorities in the Education Department to construct a boundary wall over Plot No. 325 of Khata No. 108 which according to the petitioners is a public road having length of about 250 feet and width of 18 feet with residential houses situated on either side.
The complaint of the petitioners is that once such boundary wall is constructed, there will be complete stoppage of movement for general public and as well would stop the movement of residents of the houses situated on either side.
Mr. Verma has been fair to inform that such cause has also been raised by some of the residents including some of the petitioners in T.S.No. 889/2017, wherein a prayer for injunction has been made to restrain the defendants from disturbing the movement on the public road.
Mr. Arun Kumar Bhagat, learned AC to AAG-12, informs that another title suit bearing T.S.No. 980/2017 has also been filed by some of the petitioners herein which again is pending in the court of Sub Judge, Siwan.
Mr. Verma has also been fair to inform this Court that the Supreme Court while considering such a situation where the issue has been raised before the Civil Court, has held that a Public Interest Litigation would not lie vide judgment reported in AIR 2010 SC 593 (Santosh Sood vs. Gajendra Singh & ors.). However, while making such submission he submits that appropriate direction be issued to the learned Sub Judge, Siwan for disposal of the matter.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the legal position as settled in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Santosh Sood (supra) certainly we do not intend to express ourselves on the issue but having noted that the cause have been raised by the residents of the area by way suit filed in the year 2017 with injunction petitions pending, we would direct the learned Sub Judge, Siwan who is in seisin of the matter, to consider and dispose of the injunction petitions expeditiously and preferably within six weeks of the receipt/ production of a copy of this order.
With the observations above, we dispose of the writ petition.