IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12585 of 2000 SURENDRA PRASAD & ANR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 04/ 23.9.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. 2. Petitioners are the purchasers of the lands in question from private Respondent nos. 9 to 11, who are the descendants of Bagar Raut @ Sheonandan Raut, vide sale deed dated 17.8.1984 and on the basis of the said purchase, he had applied for mutation vide Case Nos. 305 to 317 of 1996-97 and his request to mutate the lands in question on the basis of the said sale deed was allowed under orders dated 20.8.1996, Annexure-1 to this writ application, which order was assailed by private Respondent no.8, who is the descendant of Pritam Raut, the another branch of the joint family of Sakhi Chand Raut. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the mutation order was set aside by the appellate authority, the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Sikrahana, East Champaran under orders dated 15.7.1997, as contained in Annexure-2 to this writ application against which revision was filed before the Collector, East Champaran at Motihari, who maintained the appellate order dated 15.7.1997, Annexure-2 and perusala of the appellate order dated 15.7.1997, Annexure-2 as also revisional order dated 2 26.8.2000, Annexure-3 would indicate that thereunder appellate/ revisional authorities have proceeded to declare the sale deed executed in favour of the petitioners dated 17.8.1984 to be a void document, which power the two courts below do not possess, so submitted the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Having appreciated the submission of the counsel for the petitioners as also having perused the two impugned orders dated 15.7.1997 and 26.8.2000, Annexures- 2 and 3, I am of the view that the dispute, which is sought to be settled in these mutation proceedings, is required to be settled by a competent court of civil jurisdiction. In the circumstances, I direct the petitioners to approach the competent Civil Court to assert their title and possession over the lands in question on the basis of the sale deed dated 17.8.1984 and the orders passed by the two revenue authorities dated 15.7.1997 and 26.8.2000, as contained in Annexures-2 and 3 shall be subject to the findings recorded by the competent Civil Court. 5. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ application is disposed of. Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)