IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.468 of 2008 BIRENDRA RAM, S/o Gena Ram, Resident of Village – Pasiwar, PS Daraunda, District Siwan …….. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Commissioner, Saran Division at Chapra 2. The Additional Collector, Siwan 3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Maharajganj, District Siwan 4. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Siwan 5. The Circle Officer, Anchal Daraunda, District Siwan 6. Rameshwar Singh S/o Late Yamuna Singh 7. Bachcha Singh S/o Basudeo Singh 8. Sachidanand Singh S/o Late Ram Chandra Singh 9. Vivekanand Singh S/o Ram Singar Singh 10. Janak Sah S/o Deo Narayan Sah Respondents no. 6 to 10 residents of Village – Pasiwar, PS & Circle – Daraunda, Sub-Division – Maharajganj, District Siwan ……… …..Respondents ----------- 02- 18.3.2009 Heard Mr. Mohan Lal Das for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Counsel to Govt. Pleader no.I. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 10.4.2006, passed by learned Commissioner, Saran Division at Chapra in Settlement Revision No.30/99-2000, whereby the revision application preferred by the present petitioner has been rejected. It arises out of the proceeding for settlement of government land in which the present petitioner and respondent nos. 6 to 9 have been fitted against each other. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. Respondent no.10 herein had initially filed an application for settlement of Plot no.571, covering an area of 2 kathas and 8 dhurs appertaining to Khata no.173 situate in Village Pasiwar, Circle Daraunda, District Siwan. The same was registered as Case no.34/82-83. In the meantime, respondent nos. 6 to 9 herein had also filed an application for settlement of the same - 2 - land which was registered as Case no.6/90-91. Respondent no.4 ejected the said Case no.34/82-83 filed by respondent no.10 herein. Respondent no.3 had recommended the case of respondent nos. 6 to 9 for settlement of the land in question in the said Case no.6/90-91. 3. During the pendency of this proceeding the petitioner also filed an application for settlement of the same land in his favour on the ground that he is a Harijan, landless and educated person, and is running a school thereupon since 1994. The applications of the present petitioner and respondent no.10 herein were ultimately rejected by respondent no.3. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner preferred appeal before respondent no.2 who dismissed the same by his order dated 29.7.99 (Annexure 3) and affirmed the order of respondent no.3. Aggrieved by the order of respondent no.2, the petitioner preferred the revision application which has been rejected by the impugned order. 4. It appears on a perusal of the materials on record that the petitioner has not been able to establish his case of possession over the disputed land nor his eligibility as a landless person. On the other hand, the possession of respondent respondent nos.6 to 9 have been found to be genuine, based on patta by ex-landlord and also have been found eligible for settlement. In that view of the matter, the impugned order cannot be faulted. 5. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. ( S K Katriar ) mrl - 3 -