IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14892 of 2006 MOHAMMAD SAEED Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 05.08.2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the appellate order dated 23.09.2006, passed by the Collector, Supaul in Homestead Revision Case No.183 of 2004, Annexure-4, whereunder Purcha allowed to him under the provisions of the Bihar Privileged Persons Homestead Tenancy Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) has been set aside holding that petitioner is neither a privileged person nor a privileged tenant under the Act as his wife has subsequently purchased 5 Katha 3 Dhurs of land from the landlord under whom the petitioner was earlier declared as privileged tenant vide sale deed dated 29.07.2003. 3. The submission that revision at the instance of Private Respondent No. 4 ought not to have been entertained as he purchased the lands in-question vide sale-deed dated 12.06.2003 appears to be misconceived as having purchased the lands in-question private respondent entered into the shoes of the original landlord and was authorized to assail the grant of purcha in favour of the petitioner. I do not see any illegality in the revisional order dated 23.09.2006, Annexure-4 as also in the reasonings recorded in support thereof. 4. This writ application is, accordingly, dismissed P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)