IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2907 of 2010 1. JAI NANDAN MAHTO S/O SARJUG MAHTO R/O GOPALPUR CHANDWARA (RUNNI SAIDPUR), P.S. AURAI, DISTT.- MUZAFFARPUR 2. RAJNISHA W/O RAM BHAROSH MAHTO R/O MAHADEO PATTI, P.S. PARIHAR, DISTT.- SITAMARHI, AT PRESENT RESIDING AT C/77 ROAD NO. 10, PUNAICHAK, PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR, LAND REFORMS, DANAPUR, PATNA 3. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, DANAPUR, PATNA 4. SMT. KANTI DEVI D/O ARJUN SINGH R/O GANGHARA, P.S. DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA 5. SMT. USHA DEVI W/O BINOD PRASAD R/O LAHIYAR CHAK, P.O. ALAMPUR GOUPURA, P.S. PHULWARISHARIF, DISTT.- PATNA 6. SMT. RADHIKA DEVI W/O LATE RAMSEWAK RAI R/O PARSA BAZAR, P.S. PARSA BAZAR, DISTT.- PATNA 7. SMT. SONI RAI D/O KAMTA PRASAD R/O BAGHA TOLA, P.S. JANIPUR, DISTT.- PATNA 8. NILKANTH CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE CONSTRUCTION SOCIETY LTD., CHAKBINDA, PATNA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, RAJESH KUMAR SINHA, S/O LATE TARNI PRASAD NILKANTH COLONY-SECTOR-II, WEST OF A.G.COLONY SHEKHPURA, P.S. SHASHTRINAGAR, DISTT.- PATNA ----------- 3. 05.03.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. 2. Petitioners are allottee of 15 ½ decimals of land bearing Plot No. 1128 appertaining to Khata No. 282 of Village- Saidpur within Danapur Circle in the district of Patna by the Nilkanth Cooperative House Construction Society Ltd, Respondent No. 8. They have filed this writ application questioning the order dated 6.1.2009 passed by the Circle Officer, Danapur, Annexure-11, whereunder the aforesaid lands have been mutated in favour of Private Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 against which they preferred appeal before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Danapur bearing No. 02/2009-10 which was also dismissed under orders dated 1.9.2009 which is part of Annexure-12. This writ petition has been filed questioning the aforesaid two orders on the ground that earlier the private respondent nos. 4 to 7 had requested the revenue authorities to mutate the lands in- question in their favour but such request was referred by the Circle Officer under orders dated 9.2.2001, Annexure-8 to the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms who finally rejected the same vide order dated 31.3.2001, Annexure-9 by excluding the lands in-question from the mutation proceedings taken at the instance of private respondent nos. 4 to 7. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the second attempt of the private respondent nos. 4 to 7 for mutation of the lands in-question ignoring the - 2 - earlier order of mutation made in favour of Co-operative Society, Respondent No.8 has been allowed under the impugned order dated 6.1.2009 which has been affirmed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms under orders dated 1.9.2009, Annexure-12. 4. Counsel for the petitioners in compliance of my order dated 18.2.2010 passed in this case has produced the Khatiyan of the lands in-question which indicates that the same has been mutated in favour of the Nilkanth Co- operative House Construction Society Ltd., Respondent No.8 and with reference to the said Khatiyan it is submitted that the orders dated 6.1.2009, Annexure-11 passed by the Circle Officer, Danapur and the appellate order passed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms dated 1.9.2009, Annexure-12 be set aside. 5. Having heard counsel for the petitioner and the State and having perused the Khatiyan of the lands in-question indicating that the same has been mutated in favour of the Co-operative Society, Respondent No.8, I direct the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal against the order dated 6.1.2009, Annexure-11 and 1.9.2009, Annexure-12 before the District Collector in terms of the provisions contained in Section 16 of the Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973. The revision application assailing the aforesaid two orders be filed by the petitioner before the Collector of the District along with a certified copy of my order and thereafter the appeal be considered by the Collector of the district himself in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the memo of appeal challenging the aforesaid two orders. 6. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)