IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8896 of 2001 RAM RATAN SHARMA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 8. 28.1.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. Despite service of notice on respondent no.4, no one appears on his behalf. In this writ application the only question, which has been raised while assailing the correctness of the impugned orders, as contained in Annexures 1, 2 and 3, passed by the Assistant Survey Superintendent as also the Superintendent of Survey, namely, the Collector of the District, is that the case of the petitioner with regard to be an admitted joint owner of the holding in question being in dispute, he should not have been non-suited on mere technical grounds. This Court finds some force in the said submission because in the appellate order the appellate authority has accepted that the petitioner alongwith respondent no.4 are the two successors of their father Late Bishun Sharma @ Bishnu Sharma. The moment such unequivocal conclusion was 2 arrived at, there was no escape from the situation that his declaration by respondent no.4 declaring him to be the sole heir of his late father leading to entry made by an order dated 27.1.1990 was passed on fraudulent misrepresentation made by respondent no.4. That being so, when the matter was brought to the notice of the Assistant Superintendent of Survey and again before the Superintendent of Survey, they in stead of non-suiting the petitioner on technical ground ought to have decided the matter on merit. That being so, both the orders, as contained in Annexures 2 and 3, are hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the Assistant Superintendent of Survey to rehear the petitioner as also respondent no.4 on merit and decide the matter in accordance with law. With the aforementioned observation, this application is allowed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/ 3