IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12125 of 2007 1. Most. Deepkalia, widow of late Bhukhan Chaudhari. 2. Satyana Narain Choudhary, son of late Bhukhan Chaudhary. 3. Ram Bali Choudhary 4. Bishundhari Choudhary 5. Sheo Bhajan Chaudhary 6. Ram Adhar Chaudhary All sons of late Ram Dalip Choudhary. All Resident of village- Baradih Tola, P.O. Kopsar, P.S. Kochas, District- Rohtas. .... Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Director, Consolidation, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Joint Director, Consolidation (H.Q.), Bihar, Patna. 4. The Assistant Director, Consolidation, Rohtas, P.O. and P.S. Sasaram, District- Rohtas. 5. The Consolidation Officer, Kargahar. 6. The Assistant Consolidation Officer, Kargahar, P.O. and P.S. Kargahar, district- Rohtas. 7. Sobhnath Chaudhary 8. Jagroop Chaudhary 9. Shankar Chaudhary 10. Bikrama Chaudhary All sons of late Bigan Chaudhary. All Sl. No.5 to 8 are resident of village- Baradih Tola, P.O. Kopsar, P.S. Kochas, District- Rohtas. ... Respondents. ----------- 02- 24.02.2009 None appears on behalf of the petitioners. Heard Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, learned assistant counsel to Government Pleader No.11 for respondent nos.1 to 6. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 3.5.2007 (Annexure-4), passed by the 2 learned Joint Director of Consolidation (Head- quarter), Bihar, Patna, in Revision Case No.159 of 2001 (Bhukhan Chaudhary and others Vs. Shobhnath Chaudhary and others), in purported exercise of powers under section-35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956, whereby he has rejected the revision application preferred by Bhukhan Chaudhary (deceased). 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. It relates to plot no.644, appertaining to Khata no.101, covering an area of one acres, plot no.695, covering an area of 13 decimals, and plot no.637, covering an area of one decimal, total 1.14 acres of land, in the name of Ram Briksh Mahto and accordingly plot no.598, appertaining to khata no.101, covering an area of 94 decimals, plot no.669 covering an area of 2.01 acres, plot no.681, covering an area of 19 decimals, plot no.612, covering an area of 03 decimals and plot no.613, covering an area of 04 decimals, total 4.10 acres land in the name of petitioners. It appears that the petitioners had moved the learned 3 Consolidation Officer, Kargahar, Rohtas, for correction in Khatian, which was accordingly directed by the order marked Annexure-2/A, passed in Case No.199/132 of 1975-76. Aggrieved by the order, respondent nos.7 to 10 preferred appeal, which was allowed by order dated 13.11.2001 (Annexure-3), passed by the learned Assistant Director of Consolidation, Rohtas (Sasaram), in Appeal No.10 of 2001-02 (Sobhnath Chaudhary Vs. Bhukhan Chaudhary). The petitioners challenged this order by preferring revision application which has been rejected by the impugned order. The learned revisional authority has held that the claim of the petitioners is baseless. In view of the reasons assigned in the impugned order, the same is fit to be upheld. 3. The writ petition is dismissed. (S K Katriar, J.) S.K.Pathak/