IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.696 of 2009 KAMESHWAR RAVIDAS son of Late Bigan Ravidas resident of village Dogila, P.S. Bankey Bazar, Distt. Gaya . Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The District Magistrate cum Collector, Gaya. 3. The Sub-divisional Officer Sherghati, District Gaya. 4. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Sherghati, Gaya. 5. The Circle Officer, Bankey Bazar, Gaya. 6. Yogendra Ravidas son f Kamdeo Ravidas resident of village Dogila, P.S. Bankey Bazar, District Gaya. ----------- For the Appellant :- Mr. Sanjeev Kumar For the Respondents :- Mr. S. K. Jha, A.C. to S.C. IX For Respondent No. 6 :- Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha ------- 4 24/12/2009 I.A. No. 3313 of 2009: This is an application for condonation of delay of 265 days in preferring this appeal. We have heard Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. S. K. Jha, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for respondent no. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the asseveration made in the petition, we are of the considered opinion that sufficient ground did exist for condoning the delay and, accordingly, the delay in filing this appeal is condoned. I.A. No. 3313 of 2009 - 2 - stands disposed of. L.P.A. No. 696 of 2009: As we have condoned the delay, we are inclined to take up this appeal for admission. Admit. On consent of the learned counsel for the parties, it is finally heard. In this Letters Patent Appeal the legal sustainability of the order dated 4.7.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 471 of 2005 has been called in question on singular ground that when the learned Single Judge set aside the order of recall passed by the competent authority on the ground that the said authority had not provided adequate opportunity of hearing to the original petitioner, there should have been a direction for remit to hear the review application afresh. On a perusal of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, we are of the considered opinion that when the order impugned in the writ petition has been set aside on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice and the matter is of such a nature where the lis was required to be adjudicated and, therefore, we only modify - 3 - the order of the learned Single Judge to the effect that the competent authority shall decide the review matter arising out of main case i.e. Parwana Cancellation Case no. 45 of 2003-04 afresh. As the matter has been pending since long, the D.C.L.R, Sherghati (Gaya) shall dispose of the said case by end of June, 2010. The appellant as well as the respondent no. 6, who are contesting parties, shall appear before the said authority on 02.02.2010. With the aforesaid modification, the letters patent appeal stands disposed of. There will be no order as to cost. AMIN (Dipak Misra, CJ.) (Shiva Kirti Singh, J)