IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1027 of 2010 1. BHUNESHWAR PRASAD @ BHUWANESHWAR PD. S/O SRI LALLAN PRASAD R/O BHAIRO, P.S. NAWADAH ARA, DISTT. BHOJPUR 2. FAGU SINGH S/O SRI RAMCHANDER SINGH @ CHANDRAMA SINGH R/O ANAIL ARA, P.S. NAWADAH ARAH, DISTT. BHOJPUR 3. ASHOK KUMAR S/O LATE DWARIKA PRASAD R/O RAMGARHIA ARA, PS. NAWADAH ARA, DISTT. BHOJPUR 4. RAJESHWAR SINGH S/O LATE HAZARI SINGH R/O RAMGARHIA ARA, PS. NAWADAH ARA, DISTT. BHOJPUR 5. PANKAJ KUMAR @ PANKAJ SINGH S/O RAM NARAIN SINGH R/O ANAIL ARA, P.S. NAWADAH ARAH, DISTT. BHOJPUR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE HON'BLE MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE, BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER BIHAR, EXCISE OFFICE, NEW SECRETARIATE, PATNA 4. THE COLLECTOR BHOJPUR, AT ARRAH 5. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE BHOJPUR AT ARRAH ----------- 2. 21-01-2010 Heard Mr. Shivanand Prasad Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Lalit Kishore learned Additional Advocate General-3 for the State. Being dissatisfied with the order dated 18.8.2009 passed in Revision Petition No. 26 of 2009 by the Board of Revenue, Bihar, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted by Mr. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner that the Board of Revenue has rejected the Revision Petition on the ground of limitation and on the ground that petitioner had preferred only one revision though there were five petitioners. Be it noted, this Court on 19.1.2009 in CWJC. No. 2 18611 of 2008 had already granted liberty to the petitioner to file a revision. Having heard Mr. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr Lalait Kishore, learned AAG-3 for the State, we are inclined to set aside the order of the Board of Revenue as we are of the considered opinion that the petitioner’s claim which basically relates to refund of security amount that has been, as alleged, illegally forfeited, requires to be considered on the merits. On a query being made whether petitioners will supply four extra sets of court fees, learned counsel agreed for the same. In view of the aforesaid, we direct that the Revision petition shall be heard on merits on payment of four extra sets of court fees within a period of one month. The Board of Revenue is directed to deal with the matter on merits and dispose of the same within three months from the date of deposition of extra four sets of court fees. The writ petition is allowed to the extend indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. perwez (Dipak Misra, C.J.) (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)