IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5094 of 2010 1. Bharat Prasad Mahto S/O Late Banshi Mahto R/O Vill.- Murarpur, P.S.- Laheri Biharsharif, Distt.- Nalanda 2. Raj Kumar Mahto S/O Late Rameshwar Mahto R/O Vill.- Murarpur, P.S.- Laheri Biharsharif, Distt.- Nalanda Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary Patna 2. The District Magistrate Nalanda 3. The Deputy Collector, Incharge-Cum-Secretary Lok Shikayat Koshang, Nalanda 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer Biharsharif, Distt.- Nalanda 5. The Anchal Adhikari Biharsharif, Distt.- Nalanda ----------- 4 25.07.2011 Heard Mr. Sudama Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Gopal Krishna, learned A.C. to G.P.19 for the State. The writ petition was filed for quashing the order bearing Memo No. 108(s) dated 29.01.2010 whereby the respondent No. 5, the Circle Officer upon directions of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Biharsharif, respondent No.4 has stayed the measurement of the plot bearing Khata No. 322 Plot No. 941 measuring an area of 39 decimals and Khata No. 322 Plot No. 942 having an area of 31 decimals situated in Mauza Bhaisasur, P.S. Laheri, District-Nalanda. Learned counsel submits that even after accepting the contention of the petitioners regarding their possession over the plots in question, the Circle Officer, Biharsharif under the directives of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Biharsharif have stayed the measurement and hence the writ petition. A counter affidavit has been field on behalf of the respondents and in paragraph 7 thereof it is stated that a mutation case had been filed by the petitioners for mutation of their names giving rise to Mutation Case No. 114 and 115 of 2001-02. The prayer of the 2 petitioners was allowed and the names of these petitioners were directed to be entered in the Register. It is stated that one Uday Chandra Gupta, Secretary of the Gorakhshani Committee, Biharsharif filed a mutation appeal being aggrieved by the order passed in mutation case filed by the petitioners and whereupon the order passed by the Circle Officer was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration. A revision preferred by the Secretary before the Additional Collector, Nalanda also confirmed the Jamabandi of the petitioners by order dated 09.09.2009. The Secretary of the Gorakhshani Committee, Biharsharif being aggrieved by the aforesaid order has filed a Title Suit Nos. 262 of 2009 and 266 of 2009 which is pending for consideration before the Sub- ordinate Judge I, Biharsharif. It is the contention of the respondents that the petitioners herein had wrongfully got the lands in question mutated in their names by committing fraud and hence the issue of title is now pending for consideration before the Sub Judge, Biharsharif Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as the entire records are in possession of the respondent authorities, even while the mater is pending for consideration in Title Suit Nos. 262 and 266 of 2009 on the issue of title and possession over the land in question, the respondent authorities have proceeded to cancel the very possession certificate which was the basis for request of the petitioner seeking demarcation . He thus submits that the respondents ought to have refrained from taking any actions since the matter was pending before the trial Court on the adjudication of the title and possession. Be that as it may, since the issue is pending for consideration 3 before the Sub-Judge-1, Biharsharif in Title Suit Nos. 262 of 2009 and 266 of 2009, this Court without expressing any opinion regarding the merits of the case, disposes of the writ petition with a liberty to the petitioners to pursue their case in the aforesaid pending suit. Bibhash (Jyoti Saran, J.)