IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.625 of 2009 1. GOPAL YADAV @ GOPAL KUMAR, Son of late Sri Ram Yaday 2. Sugriv Yadav @ Sugriv Singh, Son of Haridwar Singh. 3. Anand Mohan, Son of late Raja Ram Singh 4. Sheoji Singh, Son of late Sheo Pujan Singh 5. Bhikhari Singh,Son of Mukteshwar Singh 6. Ajai Kumar , Son of Rejendra Prasad 7. Nandji, Son of Bihari Singh 8. Sushila Devi, Wife of Ashok Kumar 9. Indrajit Singh Yadav, Son of late Man Rakhan Singh 10. Subhash Singh, Son of Ram Bachan Singh 11. Pargan Singh, Son of Late Mathura Singh 12. Rajesh Singh, Son of late Hari Singh, all resident of Mohalla- Pandey Patti, Nai Bazar, Buxar, P.S. Buxar, Town, District-Buxar. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through Collector Buxar, District-Buxar. 2. Deputy Collector, land Reforms Buxar, District-Buxar. 3. Mostt. Raj Kuamri Devi, Wife of Ramashankar Prasad, resident of Lal Hotel, Naya Chowk, Buxar, P.S. Buxar(T) 4. Pratap Chandra Sinha, Son of Shambhu Sharan Lal 5. Kedar Nath Prasad, Son of Pach Kauri Sah. 6. Rajendra Prasad, Son of Hari Narayan Sah, all resident of village- Mohalla-Nai Bazar Buxar, P.S. Buxar, Town, District-Buxar. ----------- 2. 20.04.2009 Head learned counsel for the petitioners. This revision application has been filed by the villagers/interveners who filed a petition under Order-1 Rule-10 of the C.P.C. for intervening in title suit no. 75 of 1992 in support of the stand of the State of Bihar which had filed a suit against the defendant No.1 for declaring the judgment and decree passed in favour of defendant no.1 as null and void and for declaring the suit property as public property. The learned Court below has dismissed the application of the petitioners on the ground that the State of Bihar is competent to defend its case for declaring the suit property as public property and therefore, it is not necessary for - 2 - the villagers to come forward to support the case of the State of Bihar. The learned Court below has also found that this court has already directed it to decide the question of resjudicata as preliminary issue in view of the fact that the second appeal of the State of Bihar, against the earlier judgment and decree passed in favour of the defendant no.1, stood dismissed. In view of the observation of the learned Court below in rejecting the petition filed under Order-1 Rule-10 for intervening in the suit, I do not find any error in the order and therefore I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. It goes without saying that the villagers/petitioners, if so advised, can take recourse to law by filing a fresh suit, if necessary, in the matter for getting the landed property under suit declaring as public property, if they are legally entitled to do so. With the above observation the civil revision application is disposed of. (J. N. Singh, J.) Ravi/-