IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1448 of 2009 GAJENDRA YADAV S/O LATE PANCHI YADAV R/O VILL KHARI, P.O-PARMANANDPUR, P.S-MURLIGANJ, DISTT- MADHEPURA … Petitioner/ Appellant Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. COLLECTOR, MADHEPURA 3. DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND REFORMS, MADHEPURA 4. KAMLESH RAM S/O SRI JAI NARAIN RAM R/O KHARRI TOLA RAHTA, P.S- MURLIGANJ, DISTT- MADHEPURA 5. SADANAND YADAV, S/O LATE GORE LAL YADAV, R/O VILL- MAJAMPATTI, P.S-BARHARA KOTHI, DISTT- PURNEA 6. BHUPENDRA YADAV S/O LATE GORE LAL YADAV R/O VILL- MAJAMPATTI, P.S-BARHARA KOTHI, DISTT- PURNEA 7. DAYANAND YADAV S/O LATE GORELAL YADAV, R/O VILL- MAJAMPATTI, P.S- BARHARA KOTHI, DISTT- PURNEA 8. DULARI DEVI W/O LATE DAMODAR YADAV, R/O VILL-MAJAMPATTI, P.S-BARHARA KOTHI, DISTT- PURNEA 9. DILIP YADAV S/O LATE DAMODAR YADAV R/O VILL-MAJAMPATTI, P.S-BARHARA KOTHI, DISTT- PURNEA 10. YUVRAJ KUMAR S/O LATE JITENDRA YADAV, R/O VILL- MAJAMPATTI, P.S- BARHARA KOTHI, DISTT- PURNEA 11. VIJAY KUMAR S/O LATE JITENDRA YADAV, R/O VILL- MAJAMPATTI, P.S- BARHARA KOTHI, DISTT- PURNEA ----------- 2. 16.4.2010 Questioning correctness of the order dated 29.10.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C.No. 14097/2009 the present appeal has been filed. Before the Writ Court the grievance of the 2 appellant basically was that he has been visited with an order of restraint by the Collector under the Bihar Tenancy Act in Bataidari Case No. 51/2005-06 by the order dated 29.8.2009 without impleading him though he is a bonafide purchaser of the land. It was also contended that the proceeding under the Bihar Tenancy Act before the Collector was not maintainable. Learned Single Judge after hearing learned counsel for the appellant has observed that the appellant should take all his objections by appearing before the Collector under the Act. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant we are only inclined to direct that if the appellant files an objection before the competent authority under the Act for recall of the order of restraint on the ground that he was not heard in the matter and further there was no justification or warrant to pass any kind of order of restraint within a period of four weeks, the authority concerned shall dispose of the said application by scribing cogent and germane reasons within a period of four weeks therefrom. We may hasten to clarify we have not 3 expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. With the aforementioned modification in the order of the learned Single Judge, the appeal stands disposed of. (Dipak Misra,C.J.) (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/