IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13823 of 2010 BINOD SAH S/O LATE BALDEO SAH R/O VILL. MALDI, P.S.SHIKARPUR ANCHAL, NARKATIYAGANJ, DISTT-WEST CHAMPARAN …PETITIONER Versus 1. THE COLLECTOR WEST CHAMPARAN, BETTIAH 2. THE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR WEST CHAMPARAN, BETTIAH 3. THE S.D.O. NARKATIYAGANJ, WEST CHAMPARAN 4. THE LAND REFORMS DEPUTY COLLECTOR NARKATIYAGANJ, WEST CHAMPARAN 5. THE ANCHAL ADHIKARI NARKATIYAGANJ, WEST CHAMPARAN 6. SUNIL PASWAN S/O LATE GOPI CHAND RAM R/O MALDI, P.O.MALDI , P.S.SHIKARPUR ANCHAL, NARKATIYAGANJ, DISTT- WEST CHAMPARAN 7. BISUNDEO RAM, SON OF DHARICHHAN RAM, VILL. & P.O. MALDI, P.S. SHEIKHPURA, WEST CHAMPARAN. …RESPONDENTS For the petitioner :Mr. K. K. Tiwary For respondents 6 & 7 :Mr. B.N.Mishra For the State :Ms.Manisha Singh, AC to GA 1 ----------- 07. 03.01.2011 The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 23.07.2010, passed by respondent Anchal Adhikari in Land Ceiling Case No. 279/76-77/2/92-93, whereby the Jamabandi created in favour of the father of the petitioner has been ordered to be stopped and a direction has been issued to create Jamabandi in the name of Parchadhari (respondent no.6). Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondents 6 and 7 as well as the State. It is agreed at Bar that similar application being CWJC No. 13236 of 2010 (Phool Chuna Devi & Anr. Vs. the Collector & Ors.) involving the same facts/issue have already been disposed of by a proceeding dated 10.12.2010 in the following terms: “Having heard both sides and after perusing the material on record, this much is evident that the lands claimed by the petitioners by reason of sale effected in 2 the year 1997 was/were incorporated in the land ceiling proceeding initiated against Binod Prasad, and final adjudication was made therein followed by notification under Section 15(1) of the Act. The petitioners herein have approached the authority under Section 45B of the Act for re-opening of the proceeding and to exclude the land covered by the sale deed in favour of the petitioners. It further appears from paragraph no.8 and 9 of the writ petition that Hon‟ble Minister, the competent authority under Section 45B of the Act, is already in seisin of the matter wherein certain records/reports were called for and sent to the said authority. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered view, that the impugned order by which the names of the private respondents and other settlees have been mutated in the records of right by interfering with the „jamabandi‟ shall abide by the final adjudication to be made in the said proceeding pending before the competent authority under Section 45B of the Act at the instance of the writ petitioners. There is yet another issue to be dealt with. There appears to be claim and counter claim with regard to the actual possession of the land. It is asserted on behalf of the writ petitioners that they are still in possession of the land vended in their favour whereas respondent nos.6 to 8 have filed a counter affidavit in order to assert that right from 1992, they are in possession of the pieces of land so settled in their favour. By reason of impugned order only mutation has been directed to be issued in their favour. Thus, their being claim and counter claim with regard to possession of the land, this Court deems it expedient to observe that during the pendency of the aforesaid proceeding filed under section 45B of the Act pending before the Hon‟ble Minister, status quo with regard to the lands in question shall be maintained. It will be, however, open to the authority under Section 45B of the Act to pass appropriate orders in this regard after hearing the parties. The application is disposed of.” For the self same reasons, the present application is also disposed of in the aforesaid terms. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )