IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.19305 of 2010 KRISHNA PRASAD, SON OF LATE BALGOVIND PRASAD, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA AMBER, P.S. BIHARSHARIF, DISTRICT NALANDA. -------- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS DEPARTMENT, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3. THE COLLECTOR, NALANDA 4. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, BIHARSHARIF, NALANDA 5. THE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, NALANDA 6. THE LAND REFORMS DEPUTY COLLECTOR, BIHARSHARIF, NALANDA 7. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, BIHARSHARIF, NALANDA 8. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, BIHARSHARIF, NALANDA 9. MANOJ KUMAR, REVENUE KARAMCHARI, HALKA NO. 3, BIHARSHARIF, NALANDA. 10. ANISH KUMAR, REVENUE KARAMCHARI, HALKA NO. 3, BIHARSHARIF, NALANDA. 11. SMT. URMILA DEVI, WIFE OF CHHOTE SINGH, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA ANDAR QUILA GARHPUR, P.O. BIHARSHARIF, P.S. BIHARSHARIF, DISTRICT NALANDA. -------- RESPONDENTS ----------- 2 26.11.2010 Petitioner’s case is that the Jamabandi was running in the name of his mother Savitri Dei. One Urmila Devi vide order dated 18.7.2003, got the rent fixed for lands situated in Mauza Mahi Khandak, appertaining to Khata No. 51, Khesra No. 325 measuring 1.41 Acres. No notice was issued to the petitioner before fixation of the rent. When the petitioner got to learn about the order dated 18.7.2003, he made a complaint and there was a vigilance enquiry at the behest of the complaint made by the petitioner to the Chief Minister of the State. The Collector, Nalanda has observed vide Annexure-12 that the procedure by which the rent was fixed in favour of Urmila Devi creating a Jamabandi in her favour has not been done in accordance with the rules and, therefore, the Collector has directed that the rent should 2 not be fixed in favour of Urmila Devi until there is a proper decision by a competent Court. In the mean time, the petitioner had filed an appeal numbered as 2 of 2007. In view of the order of stay of the District Magistrate and in view of the fact that Urmila Devi has taken no steps against the order dated 16.12.2008, there is nothing left for this Court to decide at this stage. The petitioner complaints that despite the order of stay, rent receipts are still being granted by the Circle Officer, Biharsharif. This fact may be brought to the notice of the concerned authority. The petitioner would be at liberty to bring this order to the notice of the authorities concerned who will consider the order of the Collector and take steps accordingly. The petitioner may pursue his appeal before the Collector who should dispose it of as expeditiously as possible. This writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. Sanjay ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)