ORDER 1. These two cases demonstrate the utter lawlessness that prevails in the State in the name of development. By the two writ petitions, the writ petitioners make a grievance that unauthorisedly their raiyati lands were encroached upon and substantial amount of earth was cut away not only destroying crops but preventing petitioners from utilizing the lands for their agricultural purpose for over two years. This was done to fill up low line land nearby to make public road by some contractor. Petitioners protested to the local Government authorities, the district authorities but everyone turned up blind eyes and deaf ears and permitted the lawlessness to continue unabated. It was only when the matter was brought up before this Court this brazen action stopped. 2. Pursuant to directions of this Court, counter affidavits were filed by the District Magistrate, Nalanda through the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department. In both the counter affidavits, it is specifically admitted that totally unauthorisedly petitioners’ lands were damaged and substantial quantity of earth removed making it into ditch. The District Magistrate, in view of the aforesaid, then directed the Engineers to fill up the land and report compliance to this Court. Today, counter affidavits in both the cases have been filed sworn by the Executive Engineer stating that both the lands have been filled up and restored to its original position. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No.7795 of 2013 (Satish Kumar @ Satish Prasad vs. the State of Bihar & Ors.) states that so far as his land is concerned, the authorities have filled up upon intervention by this Court but in the process petitioner has lost two years of its usage for raiyati purposes. So far as the first writ petition, being C.W.J.C. No.7519 of 2013 (Koshmi Devi & Ors. Vs. the State of Bihar & Ors.), is concerned, learned counsel contests the position with recent photographs showing that in fact the ditch has not been properly filled up and much work is yet to be done. Thus, the counter affidavit is not correct. 4. Vs. the State of Bihar & Ors.), is concerned, learned counsel contests the position with recent photographs showing that in fact the ditch has not been properly filled up and much work is yet to be done. Thus, the counter affidavit is not correct. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the petitioners, I would first direct the District Magistrate, Nalanda to personally visit both the sites within 48 hours of production of a copy of this order before him ensuring that the petitioners are also present to verify whether the lands have been restored to its original shape and fit for cultivation. He would then himself file a report to that effect before this Court. 5. Now, I may address to a more distressing fact, i.e., deprivation of citizens of their property not only without authority of law rather in defiance of law by State authorities even though the object may be benevolent that would not justify the illegality. The means to achieve a laudable object has to be lawful all along and there is no question of any bona fide reason for any action. In such a matter it is a flagrant disregard of rights of citizens. 6. In such a situation, I direct the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Nalanda to pay Rs.20,000.00 (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each to the two sets of the petitioners in the two writ petitions by way of exemplary damages within one week from today. The payment has to be certified by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Nalanda himself and receipts would be filed under his affidavit before this Court. It would be open to him (the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Nalanda), having paid the said amount to the petitioners, to recover the same from any person who was responsible for this illegal act in accordance with law. 7. List this matter on 27.11.2013 under the same heading for appropriate affidavit as directed aforesaid.