Letters Patent Appeal No.1218 OF 2001 ******* Against the judgment/order dated 25.09.2001 passed in CWJC no. 11725 of 2001. ******* MAHANTH RAM DAS--------------------Appellant Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS----------Respondents ******* For the Appellant : M/s. Shiva Nand Roy & Ravindra Kr. Rai For the State : M/s R.C. Thakur, SC IV© & K. Thakur, JC ******* P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BARIN GHOSH THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M.PRASAD Barin Ghosh & C.M. Prasad, JJ. The learned counsel does not dispute that the amendment effected on 27th March, 1997 to the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, deleted altogether sub- clause (ii) of Clause (a) of Sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Act from the date of 2 the Act i.e. with retrospective effect. In such situation, we feel that there is no scope of interference, in as much as in the absence of such a provision, the power to keep 15 acres of land out of the operation of section 5 of the Act was not there in the Act and, accordingly, the application of the appellant made for that purpose became a dead application by reason of the amendment effected. In the circumstances, we are of the view that there is no scope of interference in the present appeal and, accordingly, the same is dismissed. 2. Before we part, it is our obligation to record that the learned counsel for the appellant sought to rely upon section 5 of the Amending Act and in particular sub-section (2) thereof for the purpose of contending that in view of the provisions contained therein, the 3 application of the appellant stood saved. This unfortunate submission was made without reading sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Amending Act whereby the Ordinance had been repealed and sub-section (2) declared that things done under the Ordinance are not affected despite repeal of the Ordinance. (Barin Ghosh, J.) (C.M. Prasad, J.) Patna High Court, The 23rd July, 2008. AAhmad/ (NAFR).