CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.6193 OF 1992 ****** In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. ******* Hareram Thakur, Son of Late Shri Sheopujan Thakur, Resident of Village- Sahiyar, P.S. Simari, P.O. Niyajipur, District- Buxar. .... Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Joint Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bhojpur, at Arrah. 4. The Consolidation Officer, Simari, Buxar. 5. Hari Prasad Thakur, son of late Saudagar Thakur. 6. Sidh Nath Thakur, son of Hari Prasad Thakur. 7. Ram Prasad Thakur, son of late Nand Kishore Thakur. 8. Ram Kripal Thakur. 9. Parmanand Thakur sons of late Budhan Thakur. 10. Jadunandan Thakur 11. Rama Shankar Thakur 12. Hari Shankar Thakur. Sons of late Musafir Thakur. 13. Gobardhan Bharti, chela of Mahanth Bindhyachal Bharti. 14. Gopal Thakur 15. Murlidhar Thakur All are residents of Village Sahiyar, P.S. Simari, P.O. Niyajipur, District-Buxar. ..... Respondents. For The Petitioner : Mr. Gopal Pandey, Advocate. For The Respondents: Mr. Rana Ishwar Chandra A.C. to G.P.-13. ****** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ***** S K Katriar, J. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 30.12.1991 (Annexure-5), 2 passed by the learned Joint Director of Consolidation (Headquarter), Bihar, Patna, in Revision Case No.2059 of 1988 (Hareram Thakur Vs. Hari Prasad Thakur), in purported exercise of powers under section 35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), whereby the revision application preferred by the present petitioner has been rejected. 2. It arises out of consolidation proceedings and is with respect to allotment of Chaks. It relates to Khesra Nos.321 and 317, appertaining to Khata no.9, covering an area of 1.39 acres, situate in village Ehiyar, Anchal Simari, District Bhojpur. It appears that by an earlier order dated 25.11.1986 (Annexure-2), passed by the Director, Consolidation, Bihar, Patna, in purported exercise of powers under section 35 of the Act in Case No.3204 of 1984 (Hare Ram Thakur Vs. Hari Prasad Thakur and others), the matter was remitted back for a fresh decision in accordance with law, and after consideration of the petitioner’s case. Consequently, the learned Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bhojpur, passed the order dated 27.4.1998/10.6.1988 (Annexure-3), in Case No.8 of 3 1984-85, whereby he has disposed of the petitioner’s case. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred the aforesaid Revision Case No.2059 of 1988, which has been rejected by the impugned order. 3. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has not brought on our notice any order which had the effect of disturbing the chak allotted to the petitioner. As it relates to allotment of Chaks which are essentially issues of facts, and this Court in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction finds it difficult to interfere with the same. Thirdly, it has rightly been held in the impugned order that the petitioner has not impleaded the proper persons as necessary parties, as a result of which the learned authorities below found it difficult to proceed in their absence. 4. In the result, we do not find any merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. (S K Katriar, J.) Kishore K. Mandal,J. I agree. (Kishore K. Mandal, J.) Patna High Court, Patna Dated the 13th day of January, 2010 S.K.Pathak/ (NAFR)