Judgment 1. One of the issues in this Public Interest Litigation is alleged encroachment of land at Punjabi Colony at Chitkohra in the town of Patna. In this regard, in pursuance of the order dated 17.12.2005 the District Magistrate has filed the counter affidavit and given the list of allottees who had produced the original documents of allotment. This includes one Swam Singh Baga, who according to the chart had been allotted House Nos. 29 and 30. 2. Swarn Singh Baga has filed affidavit that certain lands which were acquired for allotment to the refugees who came to this country on partition had been illegally occupied by certain persons. He prays that in this Public Interest Litigation a direction be issued to the Collector to get the said land vacated from their occupants and be allotted to the refugees, 3. We are afraid, the present proceeding is not an appropriate proceeding to go into this question. It is not his case that the land so acquired in fact was allotted to anybody. During all these long years the right of the individuals might have crystalised. It will be unwise to pass any order for removal of the encroachment, if any, without adjudicating the right of the occupants. This will however not preclude the aggrieved person to bring an appropriate action for that purpose. 4. His further grievance is that although he is in possession of two houses, namely, House Nos. 29 and 30 at Punjabi Colony at Chitkohra but he had not been given the sale deeds thereof. In this Public Interest Litigation, we are not inclined to look into this individual grievance and issue a writ in the nature of mandamus for execution/handing over the sale deeds. 5. He shall be at liberty to approach the appropriate authority either for execution of the sale-deeds and for its handing over or he may bring an appropriate action for that purpose. 6. Needless to state that in case any such recourse is taken appropriate decision in accordance with law shall be taken. 7. This Public Interest Litigation came to be entertained by this Court as back as in the year 1990. In these long 17 years this Court guided by the principle of continuous mandamus passed several orders to mitigate the hardship of people at large. 8. 7. This Public Interest Litigation came to be entertained by this Court as back as in the year 1990. In these long 17 years this Court guided by the principle of continuous mandamus passed several orders to mitigate the hardship of people at large. 8. It is common ground that the petitioner who had initiated this Public Interest Litigation is dead. 9. No other matter is pending. This Public Interest Litigation, in our opinion, has now spent its utility, hence, we are not inclined to keep it pending. 10. However, it is made clear that any citizen shall be at liberty to approach this Court for raising any grievance concerning the public at large. 11. The record is consigned. 12. Application stands disposed of accordingly.