ORDER Tenduni Chowk is under Bikramganj subdivision in the district of Rohtas. It lies at the junction of two States Highways and this perhaps is its only claim to importance. Judging from the general conditions prevalent in the sub-divisional level Bazars/Chowks in this State, it is highly unlikely that Tenduni Chowk would have an adequate water supply system or a sufficiently safe system of sanitation. The lack of civic facilities in every day life does not seem to have deterred some of the local residents of this place under the leadership of the local M.L.A. to resolve to instal the statues of four departed leaders, namely, (i) Mahatma Gandhi, (ii) Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, (iii) Sri B.P. Mandal and (iv) Sri Jagedo Prasad Mahto. Apart from the four statues it was also decided to construct four 'gates' for the beautification of the place. In the present fragmented state of our society one may come across people who would question the selection of the leaders and would even impute narrow motives to the sponsors of the scheme. There may also be some people who would question the idea of constructing 'gates' for the beautification of the place. They would point out that the 'gate' consisting of two vertical rectangular concrete• pillars joined at the top by a 'horizontal concrete beam makes a rather ugly structure, devoid of any beauty and it would not add to the beauty of the place. 2. However, beauty as it is said, lies in the eyes of the beholder and the selection of the leaders for thus being honoured depends upon the personal predilection of the selectors. These aspects of the matter, therefore, are of absolutely no concern to this court. What, however, becomes a matter of concern to this court is the objection raised on behalf of the petitioners, and quite vehemently too, regarding the spots at which the four statues are installed and the gates are being constructed. 3. In order to appreciate the objection raised on behalf of the petitioners it would be necessary to broadly follow the geography of the place. It may be noted here that in pursuance of the order, dated 5.7.99 passed in CWJC No. 4478/1998, the S.D.O. Bikramganj has filed a supplementary counter affidavit enclosing as Annexure-B a 'site plan of Tenduni Chowk, Bikramganj'. It may be noted here that in pursuance of the order, dated 5.7.99 passed in CWJC No. 4478/1998, the S.D.O. Bikramganj has filed a supplementary counter affidavit enclosing as Annexure-B a 'site plan of Tenduni Chowk, Bikramganj'. A similar map is also enclosed as an annexure in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents (and affirmed by the Executive Engineer, Road Construction Division, Dehri-on-Sone) in CWCJ No. 6682/1998. It is on the basis of the aforesaid site plans that this court proceeded to examine the spots where the four statues are installed and four' gates' are being constructed. 4. Tenduni Chowk is situate where two State highways cross each other. It is at this place that Sasaram-Arrah road running from south to north is intersected, almost at right angles by the Dumraon-Nasriganj road running from west to east. A large round-about is formed at the point of intersection of the two roads. Also passing through the point of inter section of the two roads is the Sone canal which runs diagonally from north east to south west. The canal which naturally runs above the ground goes underground while passing through the round about formed at the point of intersection of the two roads. The existence of the canal considerably reduces the flanks of the two roads. From the site plant appears that towards the northern side of the roundabout the eastern flank of the Sasaram Arrah road is only 5.7 metres, that being the distance between the metalled portion of the road and canal. Towards further north of the road, the distance between the metalled portion of the road and the canal is shown to extend upto 16 metres. The same is the position regarding the northern flank of Dumraon-Nasriganj road towards the eastern side of the roundabout. The same position is duplicated as the canal comes out on the other side of the round-about and on that side too the canal does not appear to leave much space for the flanks of the two roads. 5. The house of the petitioner in CWJC No. 4478/1998 is situate towards the north of the Dumraon-Nasriganj road and the west of Sasaram-Arrah road. It is at a distance of 8.6 metres from the Dumraon-Nasriganj road and 6.3 metres from the Sasaram-Arrah road. 5. The house of the petitioner in CWJC No. 4478/1998 is situate towards the north of the Dumraon-Nasriganj road and the west of Sasaram-Arrah road. It is at a distance of 8.6 metres from the Dumraon-Nasriganj road and 6.3 metres from the Sasaram-Arrah road. It consists of a number of shops facing towards south (Dumraon-Nasriganj road) and west (Sasaram-Arrah road) and according to the petitioner it is being used for commercial purposes. These are some of the permanent physical features of the place as appearing from the site plans. 6. Let us now examine the points of installation of the four statues and the points at which the four 'gates' are said to be under construction. The statue of Dr. Ambedkar is installed on the western flank of the Sasaram-Arrah road towards the north of the intersection round-about. The spot at which it is installed lies between the Sasaram-Arrah road and the house of the petitioner in CWJC No. 4478/1998. The statue which according to the petitioner is 6' x 6' in size is set up on a platform surrounded on four sides by an outer enclosure the dimension of which is 4.8 metres x 4.6 metres. The western enclosure wall of Dr. Ambedkar's ** (4.8 meters in length) covers approx. 1/3rd of the length of the house of the petitioner and it is constructed so as to leave only a space of 1.5 metres between the shops and the enclosure wall. This space is hardly sufficient even for a cycle rickshaw to pass through. The eastern enclosure wall of Dr. Ambedkar's statue appears to be far more hazardous and from the site plan it appears that it is constructed touching upon the metalled portion of the road. Its length is 5.05 metres and according to the petitioner it is go upto height at atleast 12'. 7. Further, towards north of this road, on its eastern flank is the statue of Mahatma Gandhi. This also has been installed on the flank of the road. Its distance from the eastern edge of the metalled portion of the road is not shown in the site plan but its distance from the centre of the metalled portion of the road is shown to be 13.4 metres. 8. This also has been installed on the flank of the road. Its distance from the eastern edge of the metalled portion of the road is not shown in the site plan but its distance from the centre of the metalled portion of the road is shown to be 13.4 metres. 8. On the same road immediately towards the south of the intersection round-about are installed the statues of Sri B.P. Mandal (on the western flank) and opposite it, of Sri Jagdeo Prasad Mahto (on the eastern flank of the road). In their case too the site plan does not give the distance of the two statues from the respective edges of the metalled portion of the road but they are shown to be at a distance of 14.3 metres from the centre of the metalled portion. 9. Now coming to the gates two gates are being constructed on the Sasaram-Arrah road, one on each side of the intersection round-about and similarly two on the Dumraon-Nasriganj road one on either side of the intersection round about From the site plan it appears that the rectagular vertical pillars are constructed on the road flanks very close to the metalled portion of the road. In fact one of the pillars on the Sasaram-Arrah road towards the northern side of the intersection round-about is on the metalled portion of the road itself. The dimension of this pillar is 3.3 metres x 2.7 metres. 10. From the above description, as appearing from the site plans submitted by the respondent authorities it ex facie appears to me that the four statues are installed and the four gates are being constructed at such points at the intersection of the two roads that those structures are bound to pose serious traffic hazards and the traffic risks would only aggravate with the passage of time as those structures will block any future improvement and widening of the roads at that place. 11. 11. It may be noted here that this court has been anxious to have the roads of this State freed from encroachments and a bench of this court has been passing repeated order in CWJC No. 2290/1990 (Arun Kumar Mukherjee vs. State of Bihar) for the removal of encroachments from roads and road flanks and unauthorised structures even on private land, abutting on the road, and constructed in a manner so as to cause obstruction in the smooth flow of traffic. By order no. 64, dated 12.7.1996 passed in CWJC No. 2290/1990 it was directed as follows : "The direction that we have been making this public interest litigation are meant for implementation all over the State. May be that the directions are issued in relation to the city of Patna but the same directions must apply to all cities in the State of Bihar. We, therefore, direct the Registrar General of this court to prepare photo copy of the entire order sheet of this case and send one copy to the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, for communication to all the District Magistrates who shall communicate the orders to the concerned District authorities who are hereby commanded to comply with the orders and directions as soon as possible. Encroachments from public land roads and flanks of the roads must be removed in the first instance followed by removal of unauthorised structures wherever they are by the competent authorised. This should be followed by cleaning up of the drainage system, sewage system. We direct all the District Magistrates to submit a report as to the action taken by them on or before 26th August. 1996."(emphasis added). 12. Then by order no. 67, dated 13.9.1996, it was directed as follows : "We have from time to time passed orders for removal of encroachments primarily with a view to remove such encroachments as impede free flow of traffic. For this purpose the encroachments to be removed are those which are erected either on the road or on its flanks i.e. structures raised on the road or flanks which is State property and which tend to impede free flow of traffic. In such cases the encroachments must be removed forthwith, because no one has a right to raise any structure on the roads and its flanks. The structures may be of temporary character or permanent character that does not matter." (emphasis added) 13. In such cases the encroachments must be removed forthwith, because no one has a right to raise any structure on the roads and its flanks. The structures may be of temporary character or permanent character that does not matter." (emphasis added) 13. Further by order no. 88, dated 27.11.1998, this court gave an inclusive meaning to 'road' holding that the road consisted not only of its metalled portion but also included Kutcha flanks and strips of land, if any, kept in reserve for its future widening. The relevent portion of the order is as follows : "The first question whether if the width of the road at particular spot tallies with the width of the road shown in the revisional survey map, it is still necessary to measure and correct the boundary of the adjoining plots of land holders. Since we are concerned in this case with the public land which include not only the metalled portion of the road but even the Kachha road on the flanks of the metalled portion, the authorities are strictly concerned with the encroachments made on the rode which included the flanks. We may clarify the flanks may include not only the land which is immediately adjacent to the metalled portion, but also the land which may have been kept reserved for future widening of the road and in that sense forms a part of the road." (emphasis added). 14. From the above, it is abundantly clear that the installation of the statues and the construction of the gates on the points as indicated hereinabove were quite contrary to the express directions given by this court. 15. It is ironical that on the one hand in the purported compliance with the directions given by this court in CWJC No.2290/1990 (Arun Kumar Mukherjee vs. State), the administration all over the State launched an anti-encroachment drive and in that process committed a number of excesses everyday coming to the knowledge of this court where structures of individual citizens completely unconnected with the directions of this court were forcibly demolished and on the other hand the administration at Rohtas and Bikramganj not only allowed the installation of the four statues and the construction of the gates but seems to have extended its active cooperation to the sponsors of the scheme. In CWJC No. 6682/1998, it is stated on behalf of the petitioners and not denied by the respondents or the intervenor that the installation of the statues was inaugurated on 25.8.1997 by the Chief Minister of the State. If that be so, it is unfortunate that the Chief Minister's advisers did not give proper counsel and the Chief Minister was thus led to participate in the installation of the statues which this court considers to be quite improper and contrary to the directions given by this court. 16. At this stage, fairness demands that I must also record the submissions advanced to justify and defend the action of the respondents. Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Senior counsel appeared for the local M.L.A., respondent no. 4 in CWJC No. 4478/1998 and the submissions advanced by him were also adopted by the counsel appearing for the intervener in CWJC No. 6682/1998. On a close scrutiny of the site plans submitted by the respondent authorities Mr. Singh conceded that the western enclosure wall of Dr. Ambedkar's statue may be removed as it was constructed too close (at a distance of 1.5 metres) to the house of the petitioner in CWJC No. 4478/1998. He also conceded that a direction may be given for the removal of one of the pillars for the northern gate on the Sasaram-Arrah road which was being constructed on the metalled portion of the road and for shifting it to the road flank. He, however, contended that as regards the installation of statues on the road flanks, there could be no encroachment as it was done at the instance of the local M.L.A. and the local people and with the approval of the local administration. Mr. Singh made a somewhat startling proposition that there could be no encroachment on public land if the structure was constructed at the instance of the State. He submitted that there can be no question of the State making encroachment over its own land. The submission is quite unacceptable to me both from a theoretical point of view as well as in the context of this case. Theoritically the rights of the State over public land are circumscribed by the right of user or of any other right enjoyed by the general public and the State can deprive the members of the general public of their rights only in accordance with law. Theoritically the rights of the State over public land are circumscribed by the right of user or of any other right enjoyed by the general public and the State can deprive the members of the general public of their rights only in accordance with law. Secondly, in the context of this case the submission stems from the misconceived notion that the Government of the day and the Government functionaries are one and the same as the State. The present M.L.A. and the officers currently holding the posts of District Magistrate and the S.D.O. certainly do not constitute the State. If the submission of Mr. Singh were to be accepted it will be open to the local M.L.A. and the S.D.O. Sadar, Patna, to construct any structure of their choice on any public land, including the grounds of any public building. I am, therefore, quite unable to accept the submission made by the learned counsel. Mr. Singh also relied upon a letter, dated 12.8.1998 issued by the Chief Engineer (Transport) South Bihar, Patna. By this letter, which was issued in reply to the Executive Engineer's letter of the previous day (11.8.1998), he gave permission for the construction of the gates in accordance with the plan enclosed with the letter of the Executive Engineer. The plan is not brought on the record. The letter does not disclose the source of authority for giving the permission and to say the least it was quite unusual that permission was accorded on the very next day of the issuance of the letter by the Executive Engineer, bhojpur Road Circle, Road Construction Department, Arrah. This only indicates the degree of application of mind to the issue. It is further to be noted that the two letters were issued by the Executive Engineer and the Chief Engineer respectively much after the controversy in this writ petition had come before this court. For these reasons I am not prepared to place any reliance on the letter issued by the Chief Engineer. 17. It is further to be noted that the two letters were issued by the Executive Engineer and the Chief Engineer respectively much after the controversy in this writ petition had come before this court. For these reasons I am not prepared to place any reliance on the letter issued by the Chief Engineer. 17. On the basis of the foregoing discussion I am constrained to find and hold that the sponsors of the project completely misdirected themselves in the selection of the sites/points for the installation of the statues and the construction of the gates and I feel convinced that in the facts and circumstances as noted above, the four nobel souls of this country perhaps would have been the first to object to the installation of their respective statues on the sites/points as indicated above. The four statues must, therefore, be removed with due respect and the structures including the platform, enclosure walls etc. must also be removed to restore the earlier position of the road flanks. The gates must also be similarly removed. The four statues may be installed at other appropriate places such as the Collectorate, Subdivisional Office, local college, school etc. It is made clear that this is only by way of illustration and suggestion and the installation of the statues at any place can take place only in accordance with the relevant rules and with the express consent of the head of the institution. The removal of the four statues and the constructions made for their installation as also the removal of the four gates and the restoration of the roads and the road flanks to their earlier position must be completed within a fortnight from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 18. In the result, these two writ petitions are allowed but with no order as to costs.