IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6990 of 2007 Pradeep Kumar Yadav, Son of Dev Narayan Yadav, Resident of Village- South Naytolia (Kosikapur), Police Station- Raniganj, District- Araria. .... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. District Collector, Araria, P.S.- Araria, District- Araria, 3. Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) Araria, District- Araria. 4. Circle Officer, Raniganj Block, P.S. Raniganj, District- Araria. 5. Rajeshwar Prasad Choudhary, Son of late Krishdeo Prasad Choudhary. 6. Kameshwar Prasad Choudhary, Son of late Krishdeo Prasad Choudhary. Both resident of village- Kala Baluwa, P.S. Raniganj, District- Araria. ..... Respondents. ----------- 02- 5.2.2009 Heard Mr. Shiva Shankar Sharma for the petitioner, learned assistant counsel to Mr. Rajesh Kumar No.2, Government Pleader No.19 for respondent nos. 1 to 4, and Mr. Siyaram Shahi for respondent nos.5 and 6. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 28.2.2007 (Annexure-4), passed by the learned Collector of the district of Araria, in Mutation (Revision) Case No.36 of 2003-04/159 of 2004-05 (Rajesh Choudhary and others Vs. Pradeep Kumar Yadav), whereby the revision application preferred in terms of section 16 of the Bihar Tenants’ Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act 1973, by 2 respondent nos.5 and 6, has been allowed, the order of the learned appellate authority has been set aside, and that of the learned first authority has been restored. In substance, the lands in question have been ordered to be mutated in the name of respondent nos.5 and 6 herein. The respondents have placed on record their counter affidavit and have supported the impugned order. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. It is with respect to Plot no.1661, appertaining to Khata no.246, covering an area of 4.10 acres, situate at Mouza Koshikapur, P.S. Raniganj, District- Araria. The petitioner’s application for mutation was rejected by order dated 26.4.2003 (Annexure-2). The petitioner rested his claim for mutation on the basis of a registered deed of absolute sale of 2003 from Maya Devi. She traced her own title on the basis of a registered deed of gift of 21.6.1963 (Annexure-5/A), from Bishundeo Choudhary, her husband. The petitioner’s application was rejected on the ground that the land in question had been shown in the proceedings under the Bihar Land Ceiling Act in the names of respondent nos.5 and 6. The 3 petitioner’s appeal succeeded vide order dated 10.12.2003 (Annexure-3), passed by the learned D.C.L.R., Araria, in Case No.1 of 2003-04 (Pradip Kumar Yadav Vs. Rajeshwar Pd. Choudhary). The revision application preferred by respondent nos.5 and 6 herein has been allowed by the impugned order. Respondent nos.5 and 6 rested his case on the ground that the lands in question be allotted to the father of respondent nos.5 and 6, in the family partition way back in the year 1966. It thus appears to me that it involves issues relating to title which cannot be adjudicated in writ jurisdiction. 3. In that view of the matter, as prayed for by learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is permitted to be withdrawn with the liberty to institute a civil suit in a court of competent jurisdiction for declaration of right, title and interest. (S K Katriar, J.) S.K.Pathak/