ORDER None has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. However, Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, learned Government Advocate No.9, appears for the State and we have heard him. 2. From this writ application, made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which has been filed in the form of Public Interest Litigation, it transpires that the petitioner has purchased a plot of land. The petitioner has filed a petition before the respondent No.4, namely, Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Muzaffarpur, seeking recourse to the provisions of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in order to get removed the alleged encroachment or obstruction from the pathway leading to his land. 3. From the narration of facts in the present petition and the materials on record, it clearly transpires that this application cannot be treated as a Public Interest Litigation, as this application involves individual interest of the petitioner and his grievance that the pathway to his land has been encroached or obstructed upon, can be remedied by taking recourse to the provision of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 4. Situated thus, it is clear that the present proceeding is wholly misconceived and stands, therefore, dismissed.