IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1545 of 2008 BASUDEO YADAV,son of late Nageshwar Yadav, resident of village-Pathra, P.O. & P.S.- Amas, District-Gaya.. Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. Joint Director of Consolidation, Magadh Division, Gaya. 3. The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Sherghati, Gaya. 4. The Consolidation officer, Amas, Gaya. 5. The Executive Magistrate, Sherghati, Gaya .. .. Respondents Ist set. 6. Kailash Yadav 7. Dilip Yadav 8. Kamdeo Yadav Six to eight are sons of Late Chandradeo Yadav. 9. Smt. Jamuni Devi,widow of Late Chandradeo Yadav. All residents of village- Pathra, P.S.- Amas, P.O.-Amas,Distrtict-Gaya..Respondents 2nd set. ----------- For the Petitioner :M/s Wasi Ahmad Khan & Sajid Salim Khan,Advocates For the Private Respondents :Mr. Nand Kishore Pd. Sinha, Advocate For the State :M/s Sunil Kumar Mandal, S.C.XV & Bipin Kumar, Advocate. ---------- 06/ 26-10-2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Respondent no.2 in this writ application, who was Joint Director, Consolidation, had ordered for entering the names of the respondents 2nd set in the Chakbandi record with respect to Mauza- Pathra, Thana no.523 regarding Khata No.111, plot nos. 35, 203, 204, 341, 393, 97, 190 and 78. The case of the respondents 2nd set is that admittedly the lands were recorded in the name of Nageshwar Yadav. 2 Nageshwar Yadav had two sons, the petitioner and his brother Lakhan Yadav. It is said that Lakhan Yadav died on 26-09-1995, after which the entire lands came into possession of the petitioner. The petitioner disputes the sale deeds dated 26-09-1996 executed by Lakhan Yadav in favour of the respondents 2nd set. Counsel for the petitioner submits that Lakhan Yadav had filed complaint case alleging that the respondents 2nd set had got the said sale deeds executed by cheating Lakhan Yadav. The complaint case was heard finally by the Judicial Magistrate and the respondents 2nd set were acquitted from the charges levelled against them under Sections 420, 467 and 168 of the Indian Penal Code. The judgment has been annexed as Annexure-D to the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents 2nd set. The respondents were claiming that the case of the petitioner that Lakhan Yadav died on 26-09-1995 is falsified by the fact that Lakhan Yadav filed the complaint case vide Complaint Case No. 191 of 1996, the judgment of which was delivered in the year 2000. The petitioner has not been able to dispute this aspect of the matter. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the sale deeds were executed in favour of the respondents 2nd set who had apprently cheated his brother. It is alleged, the sale deeds are completely false and forged documents. This aspect of the matter can only be decided in a proper civil suit. The present position is that the respondents 2nd set hold valid sale deeds, on the basis of which names have been mutated by the Circle Officer. Considering all these aspects of the matter, I do not find 3 any illegality in the order of the Joint Director. This writ application is thus dismissed. A.H./ ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )