JUDGMENT By the Court.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State-respondents. 2. Simple prayer made in the this public interest litigation is to direct respondents No. 1 to 3, i.e. Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, U.P., Lucknow, Collector/District Magistrate, Azamgarh and Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, district Azamgarh to constitute a Committee headed by the District Magistrate, Azamgarh for inquiring into illegal encroachments and illegal occupation of respondents No. 5 to 10 over plot No. 304, which is claimed to be a public pond, situated in Village Telhua Chakwalli, Pargana Chiraiyakot, Tehsil Sadar, District Azamgarh and to get the land vacated from such illegal encroachments. 3. After the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Jagpal Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others, reported in AIR 2011 SC 1123 followed by some other judgments, upon directions of this Court, the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow has issued a circular dated 4th October, 2012. Para-1 of that circular simply refers to certain directions of this Court in a writ petition bearing number 6472 (M/B) of 2012 (Om Prakash Verma and others v. State of U.P. and others) and judgments of the Apex Court including that in the case of Jagpal Singh’s case (supra), but Para-2 is relevant for the purpose. The same runs as hereunder : Þbl lEcU/k esa eq>sa ;g dgus dk funs’k gqvk gS] fd xzke lHkkvksa dh Hkwfe ij rkykc@iks[kj@pkjkxkg ,oa dfczLrku ij voSèk dCtk@vfrdze.k dks gVokus ds lEcU/k esa izeq[k lfpo] jktLo foHkkx] mRrj izns’k 'kklu dh v/;{krk esa cgqlnL;h; lfefr dk xBu fd;k x;k gS ¼Nk;k izfr layXu½A vr% vuqjks/k gS fd mDr xfBr lfefr dk izpkj izlkj vius {ks+= ds nSfud lekpkj i=ksa@dscy pSuyksa ij fu;fer vk/kkj ij djkuk lqfuf’pr djsa] rFkk vius vius e.My@tuin ds leLr xzke lHkkvksa ds lnL;ksa ls voS/k dCtk@vfrdze.k dh f’kdk;rsa izkIr dj le;c) :i ls tkWp dh dk;Zokgh lqfuf’pr dj d``r dk;Zokgh dh izxfr ls vius e.Myk;qDr ds ek/;e ls ifj"kn dks ikf{kd :i ls miyC/k djkuk lqfuf’pr djsaAÞ 4. We have noticed that large number of similar writ petitions are being filed only for enforcement of law laid down in the case of Jagpal Singh (supra) and some subsequent judgments. 5. We have noticed that large number of similar writ petitions are being filed only for enforcement of law laid down in the case of Jagpal Singh (supra) and some subsequent judgments. 5. In view of direction noticed in the aforesaid circular, we are of the considered view that if complaints regarding unauthorized occupation over the public ponds or other similar public lands are received by the District Magistrate of a District, he should take all the required actions in view of law already settled in the case of Jagpal Singh and others. 6. In case, the District Magistrate finds some good reasons to seek guidance from the Members Committee indicated in Para-2 of the aforesaid circular, then he may refer the matter and seek guidance in appropriate cases. 7. So far as the present writ petition is concerned, we grant liberty to the petitioner to approach respondents No. 2 and 3 again with a certified copy of this order. The concerned respondents shall get appropriate inquiry made and take required action to protect public ponds as per law laid down by the Apex Court, expeditiously. 8. Let a copy of this order be furnished to the learned Standing Counsel for the State for communication to the Principal Secretary, Revenue, Government of Uttar Pradesh, who shall circulate a copy of this order to all the Divisional Commissioners as well as the District Magistrates so that number of such types of cases coming to this Court may be checked. 9. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of. —————