IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12855 of 2005 BHOLA BHARTI, S/O- LATE SITA RAM MEHTA, R/O- VILLAGE MIRJAWA, P.S.- TRIVENIGANJ, DISTRICT – SUPAUL Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SUPAUL, DISTRICT – SUPAUL 3. THE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, SUPAUL, DISTRICT – SUPAUL 4. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND REVENUE TRIVENIGANJ SUPAUL, DISTRICT – SUPAUL 5. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TRIVENIGANJ, SUPAUL, DISTRICT – SUPAUL 6. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, TRIVENIGANJ, CIRCLE, SUPAUL, DISTRICT - SUPAUL ----------- 8. 30.01.2009 Heard the parties. The question is with regard to the settlement. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the land in question was settled by the Additional Collector, Supaul (respondent no.3) however, possession of the settled land was not given to the petitioner, as such, he has filed the present writ application. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State wherein it has been stated in paragraph- 10 that respondent no.3 by his order dated 06.01.2004 had recalled the previous order dated 28th of January, 2003, whereby the petitioner claims that the land in 2 question was settled in his favour, as the same was against the provisions of law and therefore, directed to send the records to the District Magistrate, Supaul (respondent no.2) for appropriate orders. The documents filed by the petitioner in support of his claim are seriously disputed. In the above circumstances the petitioner is permitted to file representation for redressal of his grievances before the respondent no.2. In this view of the matter, in case petitioner files representation before the respondent no.2 within a period of six weeks, the respondent no.2 shall consider and dispose of the same by a reasoned order expeditiously preferably within a period of six months on receipt of the representation along with the certified copy of the present order. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish/- (Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J)