IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15966 of 2010 EKBALI DUBEY SON OF LATE RAMLAL DUBEY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- GANAULI TOLA SINGHA CHAPAR, POLICE STATION- BETTIAH (MUFASSIL) DISTRICT- WEST CHAMPARAN. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPLE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS, PATNA. 2. THE ANCHAL ADHIKARI, ANCHAL BETTIAH AT BETTIAH, DISTRICT- WEST CHAMPARAN. ----------- 6 07.12.2010 I.A No. 9348/2010 Present application has been filed on behalf of the intervener respondent, seeking impleadment as respondent to oppose the prayer made in the writ petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the newly added respondent no. 3, as also the State. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking following relief:- “That the present petition is for issuance of an appropriate writ directing the respondent no.2 to dispose off the petitioner’s petition filed in rent fixation case no. 70/01-02 and for any relief or reliefs the petitionerer is found entitled to”. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had filed an application (Annexure-4), before the respondent Circle Officer for mutating his name in Jamabandi No. 9, after deleting the name of the land owner/holder namely Kamla Devi. It appears the said application was filed in connection with Land Fixation Case No. 70 of 2001/02. It is the stand of the petitioner that the matter has remained pending and therefore, appropriate direction be issued for disposal of the said matter. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the newly added respondent no. 3, submits that aforesaid land fixation ceiling case no. 70 of 2001/02 stood disposed of by order dated 22.10.2005 (Annexure-3). It is apparent from the pleadings before this Court that both the parties filed writ petition before this Court vide CWJC No. 9872 of 2007 (Pramod Vyas vs. The State of Bihar) and CWJC No. 9923 of 2007 (Ikbali Dubey vs. the State of Bihar), which were heard analogously in presence of both the parties and was disposed of by a common order with the following observation:- “As far as Ikbali Dubey is concerned, he would have to 3 get a declaration with respect of his claim by a competent Court.” Learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 draw attention of the Court to Annexure-11, wherefrom it appears that the claim of the petitioner for creation of Jamabandi was earlier rejected by the revenue authorities whereafter the present application has been filed with a prayer that his application for mutation in respect of the disputed land be considered and disposed of by the Circle Officer. It is also brought to my notice that the newly added respondent no. 3 claimed himself to be the adopted son of the land owner/holder namely Kamla Devi, against whom a ceiling proceeding was initiated in which the land in question has been allotted in the unit of Kamla Devi who died during the pendency of the proceeding and substituted by respondent no.3. It is the stand of the respondent no.3, that notifications in term of Section 11(1) as well as 15(1) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of surplus Land) Act 1961, have already been issued in favour of respondents intervener (newly added respondent no. 3) the son of original land holder (Kamla Devi). From the pleadings on 4 record, it appears that this Court had an occasion to consider the issue(s) relating to title and possession over the land in question wherein it was observed that if the petitioner is in anyway aggrieved by any order of the authority, he has to seek a declaration from a competent Civil Court with respect to his title and possession over the disputed land. In that view of the matter this Courts declines to grant the relief. Petitioner if so advised may move the authority/court for appropriate relief which shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Amrendra (K.K. Mandal, J.)