Judgment 1. This matter has been filed as a Public Interest Litigation on behalf of Dighi Gram Vikash Samiti through its President Rajdeo Rai, resident of Nayatola Dighi Kala, Police Station Sadar Hajipur within the district of Vaishali. 2. The relief sought in the petition is that the respondents 1 to 6, i.e., the State respondents, be directed to remove all encroachments which have been brought on certain specified plots by respondents 7 and 8, i.e., M/s Sital Rai and Sahdeo Rai respectively. 3. The description of land is khata no. 1255, plots no. 4513 and 4514 measuring 0.97 acres and 2.41 acres respectively in village Nayatola Dighi, Police Station Sadar Hajipur within the district of Vaishali. It is accepted and there is no issue that these plots are public lands. The petitioner has made a statement that these were those plots which were turned over under the Bihar Bhudan Yagna Act, 1954. It is accepted that these were surplus which had been pulled as plots under the Act aforesaid to facilitate the donation of lands in connection with Bhudan Yagya initiated by Shri Acharya Binova Bhave to provide land to the landless and to the village community, the Gram Panchayat. The use of such lands ought to be monitored by Bhudan Yagya Committee. 4. If the aforesaid plots came as a voluntary surrender by whoever had owned them prior to coming of the Act, then the act of donating the plot was for the purpose to keep the objects of the Act i.e., in effect, the State was to receive them in trust and distribute the lands to the landless, a programme in keeping with the upliftment of the landless in rural Bihar. 5. The petitioner mentions that the respondents 7 and 8, M/s Sital Rai and Sahdeo Rai, are encroaching on these plots and, thus, the character of these plots is being rendered inconsistent with the purpose of the Act. Perhaps what the petitioner contends may be correct, but the petitioner also accepts that the plots have already been encroached upon and this is placed on record at page 4 in the proposition against Item No. 2 and again at page 6 in the first relief clause. 6. Perhaps what the petitioner contends may be correct, but the petitioner also accepts that the plots have already been encroached upon and this is placed on record at page 4 in the proposition against Item No. 2 and again at page 6 in the first relief clause. 6. As these plots had been granted for the purpose of distribution among the landless, it is understood that the erstwhile owner had rendered them in a state that they could be distributed. If that was the case then there could not have been a temple on these plots. The State of Bihar held these lands in trust. Learned counsel for the petitioner acknowledged that this temple came afterwards when these plots had already been subjected to the control of the appropriate authority under the Bihar Bhudan Yagna Act, 1954. 7. The very intention of the Act and the purpose of the social scheme to take plots by persuasion from Zamindars and distribute amojagst the landless had been prescribed in the scheme of the Act. But, religion has no place in this scheme. If on a plot which is subject to the Bihar Bhudan Yagna Act, 1954 a religious site has been built then the purpose of the Act has been violated. Religious sites may exist in peace and not in belligerence with Act, like encroachments or perhaps even adverse possession. No religious site can be created if the land is not forthcoming as a gift as this is the principle of every religion. The present case is such that it does not leave the Court without making a comment. 8. If the respondents have or. are making encroachments then let the District Administration understand that these plots have to be rendered exactly in the same shape as they were given under the Bihar Bhudan Yagna Act, 1954 and it does not matter what is the character of the encroachment. 9. Dismissed.