IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.945 of 2009 1. SHIV MANGAL PRASAD SINGH 2. Ramayan Prasad Singh, both sons of late Rudradeo Narayan Singh, resident of villageGhoswar, P.S. Hajipur, District Vaishali. ………………Appellants. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna Budh Marg, Patna-1. 3. The Deputy Director of Consolidation, Vaishali at Hajipur. 4. The Consolidation Officer, Hajipur, District Vaishali. 5. Smt. Shanti Devi wife of Rajeshwar Prasad Singh, resident of village Ghoswar, P.S. Hajipur, District Vaishali. ……………..Respondents. ----------- 4 14.12.2010 The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 8.5.2009 passed in C.W.J.C. No.6561 of 2008. In the said writ application filed on 23.4.2008 the appellant writ petitioner had assailed the order dated 22.9.1999 and 24.12.1999 passed by the Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna. The learned Single Judge after considering the submissions of the parties has held that the issue involved in the writ application being one relating to title of land can only be decided by the competent Civil Court. It has further been directed that the parties shall maintain the same position as existing on 8.5.2009 till the area is denotified under section 26 A of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 and the aggrieved party will be at liberty to approach the competent Civil Court for declaration of their right, title and interest with respect to the disputed land. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the aforesaid writ application was filed almost after nine years of 2 passing the impugned order as the second restoration application of Respondent no.5 was allowed by the Director Consolidation by order dated 22.9.1999 without giving any notice to the appellant writ petitioners who were respondents in the connected revision application and after such ex-parte restoration of the revision application the alleged notice issued to them was also never served on them and thus the final order dated 24.12.1999 was also passed by the Director Consolidation without affording opportunity of hearing to them. In our considered opinion the inordinate unexplained delay of nearly nine years by the appellant writ petitioner in moving this Court by itself was sufficient to dismiss the writ application and therefore we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge and thus while affirming the impugned order we would also reiterate the observations and directions given by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, this appeal being devoid of any merit is dismissed. Abhay Kumar (T. Meena Kumari, J.) ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)