IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2852 of 2010 1. DHAULI DEVI W/O LATE RAMADHIN PASWAN R/O VILL.- KISHUNPUR, P.O. & P.S.- BIHTA, DISTT.- PATNA 2. KRISHNA PASWAN S/O LATE SHIV PASWAN R/O VILL.- HEMJAPUR, P.O. & P.S.- KHUSRUPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER CUM SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE COMMISSIONER CUM PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR NEW SECRETARIAT, BAILEY ROAD, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT BAILEY ROAD, PATNA 4. THE DIRECTOR, SECONDARY EDUCATION, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPTT., GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 5. UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE CHAIRMAN CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, NEW DELHI 6. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION NEW DELHI 7. THE CHAIRMAN, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, EDUCATION CENTRE, 2 COMMUNITY CENTRE, NEW DELHI 110092 8. THE PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER, BUDH MARG, PATNA-1 9. THE COMMISSIONER, PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA-1 10. DAYANAND ANGLO VEDIC COLLEGE TRUST AND MANAGEMENT SOCIETY THROUGH ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR-II (ADMINISTRATIVE ASPECTS), REGIONAL DIRECTORATE, NORTH BIHAR ZONE ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR, NEW BAILEY ROAD, DANAPUR PATNA 801503 11. DR. R.K.CHAUHAN, REGIONAL DIRECTOR-II (ADMINISTRATIVE ASPECTS OF THE SCHOOL), REGIONAL DIRECTORATE, D.A.V. PUBLIC SCHOOLS NORTH BIHAR ZONE ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR, NEW BAILEY ROAD, DANAPUR, PATNA 801503 12. THE PRINCIPAL, DR. G.L.DUTTA D.A.V. PUBLIC SCHOOL KANKARBAGH, MOURYA VIHAR COLONY, TRANSPORT NAGAR, PATNA ----------- 03. 13.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, for the State, for the C.B.S.E and for the respondent 2 no.12. The controversy relates to mutation. Mutation is different from title. Both have their own operations in law. Mutation shall follow Title, Mutation shall not confer Title which can only be decided in a Suit. The mutation appears to have been done against the petitioner. His appeal has been allowed. The Revision preferred by respondent no.12 against the Appeal in turn has been allowed which the petitioner has questioned in C.W.J.C. No. 339 of 2011. On the own showing of the petitioner, this writ application has become infructuous. It is accordingly dismissed. P.K. ( Navin Sinha, J.)