IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13858 of 2004 NARAYAN PRASAD SINGH Son of Sri Shibnandan Prasad Singh, Resident of Village-Hasanpur, Anchal and P.S. Hasanpur, District-Samastipur -------------Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna 2. The Divisional Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga 3. The District Magistrate, Samastipur 4. The Additional Collector, Land Ceiling, Samastipur 5. The Circle Officer, Hasanpur Block, District-Samastipur ---------Respondents with CWJC No.220 of 2005 1. NANDLAL PRASAD S/o Late Kanhaiya Lal 2. Gopal Prasad S/o Late Kanhaiya Lal 3. Kashi Prasad S/o Late Gangadhar Prasad 4. Nirmal Kumar S/o Late Jagdish Prasad 5. Gayatri Devi W/o Late Vishwanath Prasad 6. Vijay Kumar S/o Late Vishwanath Prasad 7. Deepak Kumar – do- All are residents of Hasanpur Bazar, P.S.-Hasanpur, District-Samastipur 8. Smt. Sumitra Devi W/o Late Nand Kishore Agrawal 9. Krishna Kumar Agrawal S/o do 10. Dilip Kumar Agrawal, S/o do. All the three are residents of Mohalla-Pethiyagachhi under Town, P.S. and District-Samastipur -----------Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Special Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Department of Revenue, The Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 3. The Collector, Samastipur 4. The Additional Collector, Samastipur 5. The Circle Officer, Hasanpur Anchal, P.S.-Hasanpur, District-Samastipur 6. Narayan Prasad Singh S/o Sri Shivanandan Prasad Singh, resident of Village- Hasanpur, P.S.- Hasanpur District- Samastipur (Bihar) -------------Respondents ----------------------- - 2 - For the Petitioners:- Mr. B.N. Sinha “Suman”, Adv. Mr. Lalit Kumar Singh, Adv. For the State:- Mr. K. Thakur, Adv. For the Private Respondent :- Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, Adv. Mr. Rishit Deo Kumar Singh, Adv. ------------- 10. 15.11.2010 These matters arise out of a ceiling case that is Ceiling Case No. 8/73-74 initiated against the land holder Shiv Nandan Prasad Singh Petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 13858 of 2004 is the son of Shiv Nandan Prasad Singh. Petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 220 of 2005 are purchasers of certain lands as described in para 6 of the writ application. Both set of petitioners are aggrieved by the order of the Collector, Samastipur dated 1.12.2001. The background of this case is that in the ceiling proceeding writ petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 220 of 2005 had filed an objection after declaration under Section 10 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the „Act‟). After several orders finally Member Board of Revenue, Bihar Patna by order dated 10.5.1983 remanded the matter to the Collector for reconsideration, on the question, as to whether the transfer made by the original landlord on 7.2.1974, in favour of the writ petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 220 of 2005, was made for the purposes of defeating the provisions of Act. After remand of the matter it was considered by the Collector on 12.6.1986 and the - 3 - Collector came to the conclusion that the lands which have been sold by Shiv Nandan Prasad Singh after 9.9.1970 would come within the share of the land holder. It was ordered that about 6 Bigha 17 Khata and 7 Dhurs of lands should be included in the share of the land holder. As far as the order of the Additional Collector‟s order dated 16.8.1986 is concerned, it remained unchallenged by the land holder or any other party. In the meantime one Bishnudeo Mahto and others filed a writ in this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 960 of 1982. The writ petitioners claim title with respect to Khesra No. 80 and 130, appertaining to land of Khata No. 140 in the village Khursanda, in the District of Samastipur. This Court directed that the Collector, Samastipur should decide the issues raised by the petitioners under Section 37 of the Act. This Court directed that respondent no. 4 should appear before respondent no. 2, and if it was found, that the Land Holder has transferred the land to defeat the provision of the Act, the Collector or any other authorities under the Act should delete the land of the petitioner from the final statement and shall not include the lands in the notification under Section 15 of the Act. The matter, accordingly, as per the directions of this Court came to be heard by the Collector, Samastipur who disposed of the - 4 - matter by order dated 1.12.2001. Eight persons including the landlord and Bishnudeo Mahto appeared before the Collector and filed their objections. The Collector ordered that lands of Khesra No. 130 Measuring 87 decimals would be included in the unit of the landlord, whereas Khesra No. 80 should be excluded from the list of lands declared surplus. The objection filed by the others was rejected. Petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 220 of 2005 are aggrieved by the fact that the Collector is not implementing the decision dated 12.6.86 passed in C.A. No. 20/80-81 / 8/73-74 with respect to these petitioners. This Court makes it clear that the writ petitioners have not moved this Court for a direction to reopen their matter. The writ petitioners are quite satisfied by the order dated 12.6.86 by which the lands, they had acquired by the sale deed dated 3.2.1974 was found to be a valid and genuine sale deed. The landlord on the other hand also not moved any authority against the decision dated 8.12.86 therefore, there was no occasion for the Collector to pass any order relating to the land as described at paragraph 6 of C.W.J.C. No. 220 of 2005. I find that there is no specific order relating to the petitioners claim and therefore I find that the case of petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 220 of 2005 will not covered by the order dated 1.12.2001. It has been stated by the petitioners of C.W.J.C. - 5 - No. 220 of 2005 that lands appertaining to C.S. Plot No. 345 C.S. Khata No. 59 R.S. Plot No. 419, 430 (R.S. Khata No. 15) Mauja-Mahuli having an area of 30 decimals of land was purchased by a registered sale deed dated 18.1.1988, by the father of the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, which lands belonged to Asharfi Lal Das. It is submitted that original land holder and the subsequent purchaser, has no connection with Shiv Nandan Prasad Singh or his sons. It is submitted that these lands have been wrongly included by the authorities in the land ceiling proceeding as the land does not belong to Shiv Nandan Prasad Singh. He has raised this plea at a belated stage. Nevertheless the petitioner may file an application, if so adviced under Section 45 (b), before the Minister concerned, for reconsideration of his case with respect to R.S. Plot No. 345, Khata No. 59 R.S. Plot No. 419, 430. Coming to the case of writ petitioner Shiv Nandan Prasad Singh it appears that Narayan Prasad Singh is aggrieved by the order of reopening, to the extent, that after the Collector has withdrawn Plot No. 80 from the ceiling proceeding, the petitioner ought to get an opportunity to exercise his option with respect to rest of the lands excluded, which were subject matter of the order dated 12.6.1986. I accordingly, direct that the petitioner may be given an opportunity to exercise his option in view - 6 - of the fact that certain lands have been excluded from the ceiling proceeding as per the order dated 1.12.2001. It has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that lands that do belong to the petitioner have also been clubbed along with his land. The petitioner after the order of remand by this Court, has filed his objection, it appears that the objections of the petitioner has not been considered. The objection of the petitioner with respect to Plot No. 80 has also not been considered by the Collector. It would require the Collector to hold an enquiry with respect to the actual owner of the plot no. 80 and thereafter the Collector may take a decision in the matter. Needless to say, the Collector may entrust the enquiry to any officer, he thinks fit and proper. I accordingly direct Narayan Prasad Singh should appear before the Collector, Samastipur within a period of four weeks on receipt of the copy of this order. The Collector will examine the objection filed by the petitioner after the case of remand vide C.W.J.C. No. 960 of 1982. The writ application of C.W.J.C. No. 220 of 2005 is allowed to the extent aforesaid, whereas C.W.J.C. No. 13858 of 2004 is disposed of with the aforesaid directions that the objection of the petitioner ought to be considered by the Collector, Samastipur. The petitioner may make prayer before the Collector that the lands should not be - 7 - distributed in order to avoid further complications and to avoid third party interest. Anand Kr. (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)