IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.740 of 2010 1. DASRATH PRASAD SINGH, S/O LATE BACHKUN PRASAD SINGH, R/O VILLAGE- GARIBA, P.S.- PAROO, DISTRICT- MUZAFFARPUR. 2. SHYAM KESHI DEVI, W/O SURENDRA PRASAD SINGH, R/O VILLAGE- MOTI CHAPRA, P.S.- PAROO, DISTRICT- MUZAFFARPUR. 3. RAM NARESH SINGH, S/O LATE KRISHNADEO NARAIN SINGH, R/O VILLAGE- MOTI CHAPRA, P.S.- PAROO, DISTRICT- MUZAFFARPUR. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE COLLECTOR,MUZAFFARPUR. null DISTRICT-MUZAFFARPUR. 3. THE CIRCLE OFFICER,PAROO, DISTRICT-MUZAFFARPUR. 4. GOBARI PASWAN, S/O MUNESHWAR PASWAN, R/O VILLAGE-DAMODARPUR,P.S.- PAROO, DISTRICT-MUZAFFARPUR AT PRESENT VILLAGE-GARIBA,P.O AND P.S.- PAROO,DISTRICT-MUZAFFARPUR. ----------- 3. 27.04.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned Counsel for the State. The fact that Plot no. 1187 may be only Gairmajarua Aam land and not Plot no. 1188, inadvertently recorded as Gairmajarua Aam land, is not relevant to the controversy. Learned Counsel for the appellants has taken us through the pleadings of the writ petition along with the Annexures. We find no reason to take a view different from that taken in the judgment under appeal that adequate materials had not been placed by the appellants before the Collector in support of the plea that the respondent no. 4 did not fulfil the requirement for being a privileged person and for that fact new facts cannot be agitated in the writ petition. This appeal is dismissed. (Navin Sinha,J.) (Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.) Snkumar/-