IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.881 of 2004 1. BIBHUTI BHUSHAN RAI, Son of Late Murlidhar Rai. 2. Aditya Kumar, Son of Late Malti Devi, Resident of Village & P.S. Barhaiya, District Lakhi Sarai. 3. Gopi Krishna Rai, Son of Late Surendra Rai. 4. Sadanand Rai, Son of Late Murlidhar Rai. 5. Shiv Nandan Rai, Son of Late Dhanusdhari Rai. 6. Gauri Shankar Rai, Son of Late Chandradhar Rai. 7. Kamta Prasad Rai, Son of Late Prandhan Rai. 8. Panchanand Rai, Son of Late Bhagwat Rai. 9. Tripurari Rai, Son of Late Indra Narayan Rai. 10.Viveka Nand Rai, Son of Late Satya Narain Rai. 11.Sudarshan Rai, Son of Late Dhiraj Rai. 12.Gangadhar Rai, Son of Late Sukhdeo Rai. 13.Nageshwar Rai, Son of Late Jagarnath Rai. 14.Nitya Nand Rai, Son of Late Sachidanand Rai. All Residents (except appellant no. 2) of Village Maldah Dih, P.S. Chandra Mandi, District Jamui. ……….Petitioners/Appellants Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. The Collector, Jamui. 3. The Dy. Collector Land Reforms, Jamui. 4. The Anchal Adhikari, Chakai, District Jamui. ……….Respondents/Respondents For the Appellants - Sri Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate Sri Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the State - Mrs. Amrita, S.C. IInd ----------- 09/- 26/04/2011 The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed against the order dated 02.08.2004 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 1004/2004, upholding the orders passed by the authorities Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Jamui, dated 03.12.2002 in Land Ceiling Case No. 02/2002 (Annexure – 1), whereby it has been questioned that a total 142.62 acres of lands of the petitioners-appellants have been declared surplus out of which 137.96 acres have been 2 acquired and distributed and the impugned order has been passed to take over the balance of 4.66 acres of land from the land holders and to take steps for distribution. The main contention urged before learned Single Judge was that no notice has been served for taking over of the balance of 4.66 acres of land and hence direction has been issued to take over the same, but, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground of delay, latches, negligence and acquiescence. It has also been observed that the appeal has been preferred by the land holders and direction has been issued by Division Bench of this Court on 27.06.2005 to the then Government Pleader to produce the evidence of serving of notices at the land holders. When the matters come up today for final hearing, learned Standing Counsel to the Government Pleader submitted that there is no evidence available of service report of the notices served on land holders from the records. Recording such submission it will suffice that the matter is remanded back and the appellants have to be afforded an opportunity to submit the case before the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Jamui. The appellants being the land 3 holders, are directed to appear before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Jamui, on 6th of June, 2011 to submit their case by filing written submission, supported by the documentary evidence, and on such filing of the written submission, the Deputy Collector shall afford an opportunity of hearing of all the parties concerned and to pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks thereafter. With the above observations, the impugned order dated 02.08.2004 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1004/2004 by the learned Single Judge is set aside. Accordingly, this Letters Patent Appeal stands allowed. It is also made clear that if the petitioners- appellants do not co-operate with the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Jamui, during the course of proceedings, we are of the opinion that the order passed by the Deputy Collector on 03.12.2002 (Annexure -1) to the writ petition would become operative. Rajeev/Praveen ( T. Meena Kumari, J.) ( Akhilesh Chandra, J.)