IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.12135 OF 2009 (1) ARVIND KUMAR CHAURASIA BAIRIA, MEHDI, TIKAPATTI, RUPAULI, PURNEA (2) NAVEEN PD CHAURASIA, BAIRIA, PURNEA (3) PRAVEEN KUMAR CHAURASIA, PURNEA (4) NAND LAL PD CHAURASIA, BAIRIA, PURNEA VERSUS (1) THE STATE OF BIHAR (2) DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PURNEA (3) DCLR, PURNEA (4) SDO CUM DY COLLECTOR, DHAMDAHA, PURNEA (5) THE BDO RUPAULI, PURNEA (6) CIRCLE OFFICER, RUPAULI, PURNEA (7) CIRCLE INSPECTOR, RUPAULI (8) AJIT KUMAR SINGH, BHAWA DEODHI, RUPAULI (9) BHAGALI MUSHAR, BAIRIA, RUPAULI, PURNEA (10) MAHINDRA HARIJAN, BAIRIA, RUPAULI. ----------- 2 15.09.2009. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioners are purchasers of land in question by registered sale deed from one Mosmat. Shyama Devi, who in turn had purchased the land from ex land lord in the year 1950. After purchase of land, petitioners applied for mutation, but mutation order was passed only in respect of some of the land and no order was passed in respect of lands which are subject matter of dispute in this case. In the meanwhile, Ceiling case no. 170/1973-74 was notified and the land which was purchased by the petitioners was declared surplus along with other land. Thereafter two purchas have been issued in respect of the land. The petitioners submit that they are still in possession of the land and issuance of Purchas is only symbolic. Having head the parties, this court is of the view that the petitioners should approach the authority under section 45B of the Land Ceiling Act. As the petitioners submit that they are in possession of the land, no coercive steps would be taken against - 2 - them for six weeks from filing application under section 45B of the Land Ceiling Act. Status quo as of today would be maintained by the parties for six weeks as stipulated above. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)