IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9696 of 2009 1. MANOJ KUMAR MISHRA, SON OF LATE GAURI KANT MISHRA 2. NARENDRA KUMAR MISHRA, SON OF LATE GAURI KANT MISHRA BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE MANGRAUNI, TOLA JITBARPUR, P.S. AND ANCHAL RAJNAGAR, DISTRICT MADHUBANI. ---- PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. COLLECTOR, MADHUBANI. 4. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, MADHUBANI. 5. DEPUTY COLLECTOR, LAND REFORMS, SADAR, MADHUBANI 6. MD. QUASIM @ KARI SON OF LATE AMIN MOMIN, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA LAHERIAGANJ, WARD NO. 8, WITHIN MADHUBANI TOWN, P.S. AND DISTRICT MADHUBANI. 7. MOST. RUBAIDA KHATOON, WIDOW OF LATE MD. HUSSAIN, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA LAHERIAGANJ, WARD NO. 8 WITHIN MADHUBANI TOWN, P.S. AND DISTRICT MADHUBANI. 8. PACHKAURI TANTI, SON OF LATE SUBODH TANTI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KALIKAPUR, P.S. KALUAHI, DISTRICT MADHUBANI. ---- RESPONDENTS ----------- 4 19.7.2010 The petitioners have filed this writ application challenging the notice issued to him dated 10.6.2009 by the Additional Collector, Madhubani on the ground that only the Collector of the district has the power under Section 30(1) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961, to hear matters with respect to an appeal which is filed against the final order passed by the officer vested with the power of Collector under the Act, other then the Collector of the district to the Collector of the district or any Officers specially authorized by him. On the basis of the aforesaid provision, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that only the Collector of the district has the power to hear the appeals and the appeal filed before the Additional Collector would not be maintainable. In the result, I quash the notice passed in Appeal Case No. 3 of 2009-10 pending before the Additional Collector and direct 2 that the respondents may pursue the appeal numbered as 2 of 2009-10 that they had filed before the Collector. It would be proper that the Collector should conclude the appeal within a period of eight months. The Collector will consider the application filed by the respondents for staying further proceedings in the matter in the interim period. This application is allowed. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)