IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.4365 of 2009 1. DEO NARAIN YADAV S/O LATE ADHHELAL YADAV R/O VILL MAHMADI NGAR, TOLA MAHULI, P.S ROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR. 2. RAMGATI YADAV S/O LATE ADHHELAL YADAV R/O VILL- MAHMADI NGAR, TOLA, MAHULI, P.S ROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR ----------- Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE ADDL. COLLECTOR, SAMASTIPUR. 2. MAHINDRA YADAV S/O LATE ANAND YADAV R/O VILL-MAHMADINAGAR, TOLA MAHULI, P.S ROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR. 3. DAMODAR YADAV S/O LATE ANAND YADAV R/O VILL- MAHMADI NAGAR, TOLA, MAHULI, P.S ROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR. 4. GAJENDRA YADAV S/O LATE MAHABIR YADAV R/O VILL- MAHMADI NAGAR, TOLA, MAHULI, P.S ROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR. 5. BUDHHILAL YADAV S/O LATE MAHABIR YADAV R/O VILL- MAHMADINAGAR, TOLA MAHULI, P.S- ROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR. 6. MAHESHWAR YADAV S/O LATE MAHABIR YADAV RO VILL-MAHMADINAGAR TOLA MAHULI, P.S- ROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR. 7. UPENDRA YADAV S/O LATE MAHABIR YADAV R/O VILL-MAHMADINAGAR, TOLA MAHULI, P.S ROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR. 8. NARESH YADAV R/O LATE MAHABIR YADAV R/O VILL MAHMADINAGAR, TOLA MAHULI, P.S ROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR. 9. BRAHAMDEO YADAV S/O LATE BILASH YADAV R/O VILL MAHMADINAGAR, TOLA MAHULI, P.S ROSERA, DISTT- SAMASTIPUR. ------------ Respondents ----------- 2 24.2.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioners in this application is to modify the order of this Court dated 27.2.2009 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2677 of 2009 on the ground that the appeal in question was disposed of on 14.2.2009 itself without allowing the petitioners to avail the benefit of order dated 27.2.2009. Counsel would further submit that such order dated 14.2.2009 in the appeal was passed without 2 noticing them. This Court would find that in the order of this Court dated 27.2.2009 certain direction for hearing the petitioners was given on the presumption that the appeal filed by the petitioners was still pending. If the appeal had already stood disposed of on 14.2.2009 as now appears to be from the application filed by the petitioners themselves, there would be no question of complying the subsequent order of this Court dated 27.2.2009. Any infirmity in the appellate order passed on 14.2.2009 including its being passed without issuing notice and/or hearing the petitioners can now be raised in a separate proceeding before an appropriate forum against the order dated 14.2.2009. That being so, this application is disposed of with the aforementioned observations. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)