IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17583 of 2008 MD.ILIYAS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 20.7.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner who claim to be the Shikmidar has challenged the order dated 14.1.2008 contained in Annexure-1 by which the Sub-Divisional Officer, Barsoi, District- Katihar has set aside the order passed by the Circle officer under Section 48D of the B.T. Act, dated 31.1.2006. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that his forefathers were the shikmidar of Bibi Kaneez Fatima and their name was recorded as in the Khatiyan. The case of respondent as made out in the order dated 14.1.2008 that the land belonged to Bibi Kaneez Fatima, who transferred the land in favour of his daughter-in- law in the year 1957 through a gift and it is said that the daughter-in- law, respondent no. 7 came in possession of the land. Respondents further case is that shikmidar never remained in possession of the lands in dispute rather they gave up their Sikmi claim. The S.D.O. has set aside the order on the ground that the Circle Officer without giving any notice to the petitioner with respect to the inspection made on the spot by the Circle Inspector, has accepted the report of the Circle Inspector. This Court finds that S.D.O. is completely justified in passing the said order, in as much that the inspection made without notice to respondent no. 6 land holder cannot be justified. The S.D.O. - 2 - has rightly remanded the matter back to the Circle Officer and as such I find that there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order. This writ application is thus dismissed. P. Kumar (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)