Order The petitioner, in this writ petition, has prayed for quashing the order dated 1 st June, 2007 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh in B.P.L.E. Appeal No. 77 of 2005 and for quashing the order dated 13th December, 2004 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Hazaribagh in Misc. Case No. 13 of 2004 as also for quashing the order dated 30th April, 2004 passed by the Circle Officer, Hazaribagh in Encroachment Case NO.4 of 2003-04. 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that though the land, in question, is a public road and is used by the members of the Housing Co-operative and road was. constructed from the fund of the Government. It has been wrongly held by the concerned authorities that the same is not a public land and that the provision of Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act is not attracted. On that basis, they have refused to take any action. 3. Learned J.C. to S.C. (L&C), appearing on behalf of the State respondents, supported the impugned order and submitted that the land, in question, is recorded as raiyati in the record of rights. The said land cannot be said to be public land and the proceeding under Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act cannot be initiated. The said facts have been considered by all the authorities concerned. They have concurrently found that the land, being raiyati, no action can be taken under the provision of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the facts and materials on record. 5. On perusal of the impugned order, I find that the Circle Officer, Sub-Divisional Officer and the Deputy Commissioner have concurrently found that the land, in question, is recorded as raiyati land in the survey record of rights and that in such case, no action can be taken under the provision of Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the user of the land has been changed from agricultural raiyati land to residential land and that the same is being used for the purpose of road, which has been constructed from the fund of the Government, and as such, the respondents have taken erroneous view in not accepting the said land as public land and not initiating the proceeding under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act. 7. 7. The nature of the right of the land can be prima facie gathered from survey record of rights. In the instant case, it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the record of rights has been prepared under the statutory provision of Section 84 of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act (CNT Act). The said provision provides that all the entries in the record of rights shall be presumed to be correct, unless proved to be incorrect. The petitioner has claimed that by user, the nature of the land has been changed. The provision of CNT Act prescribes restricted uses of raiyati land. No order passed by any competent court/authority has been brought on record to rebut the legal presumption of correctness of the entry showing the nature of land as raiyati in the survey record of rights as also has been found and held concurrently by the revenue courts/authorities. 8. In view of the above, I find no error or illegality in the impugned orders of the respondents, concurrently holding that the land being recorded as raiyati land in the survey record of rights cannot be treated as public land and the action cannot be taken under the provision of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act. 9. I, therefore, find no merit in this writ petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed.