IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.950 of 2010 In CWJC No. 322 of 2006 With I.A. No. 5284 of 2010 & I.A. No. 5285 of 2010 ================================================ 1. Abdul Jabar, S/o Late Fazlu Mian, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 2. Jainab Khaton, W/o Late Abdul Halim, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 3. Md. Moin, S/o Late Abdul Halim, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 4. Sahajadi Khatoon, D/o Late Abdul Halim, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 5. Roshan Khatoon, D/o Late Abdul Halim, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 6. Hasina Khatoon, W/o Late Md. Sultan, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 7. Md. Nasim, S/o Late Md. Sultan, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 8. Md. Sikandar, S/o Late Md. Sultan, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 9. Md. Goda, S/o Late Md. Sultan, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 10. Md. Manan, S/o Late Md. Sultan, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 11. Md. Nanhak, S/o Late Md. Sultan, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 12. Muni Khatoon, D/o Md. Sultan, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 13. Israt Khatoon, D/o Md. Sultan, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya 14. Aliman Khatoon, D/o Fazlu Mian, R/o Vill.- Salimpur, P.S.- Mufasil, Distt.- Gaya ……………………. Respondents/Appellants 2 Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Collector, Gaya 2. The Municipal Corporation, Gaya through its Executive Officer, Gaya 3. The Superintendent of Survey, Gaya Municipal Corporation, Gaya 4. The Assistant Survey Superintendent, Gaya Municipal Corporation, Gaya 5. Rajiv Kumar Sinha, S/o Sri Kedar Nath Sinha, R/o Mohalla- Karsilli Asmashan Ghat Road, P.S.- Civil Lines, Distt.- Gaya 6. Kesar Ravidas, S/o Late Kishun Ravidas, R/o Vill.- Salempur, P.S.- Mufasil, Ward No.31, Distt.- Gaya (Bihar) ………… ………………………………………….Respondents / Respondents. ================================================ Appearance: For the appellants: Mr S.S. Dwivedi, Sr. Advocate & Mr Ashok Kr. Sinha No.3, Advocate. For the opposite party no. 2: Mr Rabindra Kr. Priyadarshi,Advocate. For the opposite party no. 6: Mr Dhrub Narayan, Sr. Advocate. =============================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 5. 06.09.2010. Re. I.A. No. 5284 of 2010. Heard the learned Advocates. Though served, the respondent no. 5 has not entered appearance. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is filed by the appellants for condonation of delay of 62 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent 3 Appeal. Learned Senior Advocate Mr Dhrub Narayan has appeared for the respondent no. 6. He has contested the application. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the delay is condoned. The Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Re. LPA No. 950/2010 with IA No.5285/2010. The appellants, respondents in the Writ Petition, have preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 16.02.2010 made by the learned single Judge in the above CWJC No. 322 of 2006. With the consent of the learned Advocates, the Appeal is heard and decided today. It is the grievance of the appellants that the impugned order dated 16.02.2010 was made by the learned single Judge ex parte against the appellants – respondent nos. 6 to 19 in the Writ Petition. It is also the grievance of the appellants that before the learned single Judge, the writ petitioner made a false representation that the impugned order dated 02.12.2005 made by the Superintendent of Survey, Gaya in Appeal No. 2090/2005 was made ex parte against the writ petitioner. It is demonstrated before us that in Appeal No. 2090/2005 the writ petitioner had appeared before the authority and had contested the appeal. Be that as it may, it is evident that by the impugned order dated 16.02.2010, the order dated 02.12.2005 made by the Superintendent of Survey, Gaya has been set aside without notice to the present appellants. 4 The impugned order is thus vitiated for violation of principle of natural justice. Besides, the writ petitioner has also filed CWJC No. 14694/2005 in the subject matter of the same dispute which is pending for hearing before the learned single Judge. Moreover, in compliance with the impugned order dated 16.02.2010, the Superintendent of Survey, Gaya reheard the Appeal No. 2090/2005. The consequent order made by the Superintendent of Survey, Gaya has been challenged by the present appellants in CWJC No. 10269 of 2010 which is pending before the learned single Judge. In above view of the matter, we allow this Appeal. The impugned order dated 16.02.2010 made by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 322/2006 is set aside. CWJC No. 322/2006 is remitted to the learned single Judge for hearing and decision afresh along with CWJC No. 14694/2005 and CWJC No. 10269/2010. The appellants will file their appearance in CWJC No. 14694/2005 within 15 days from today. The Appeal and the Interlocutory Application stand disposed of. The parties will bear their own cost. Dilip ( R.M. Doshit, CJ ) ( Jyoti Saran, J )