IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.815 of 2009 In (CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE 9522/2008) 01. Ramnath Sah, son of late Chhedi sah 02. Most. Jaimanti Devi, W/o Late Bishwanath Sah 03. Suresh Kumar Gupta 04. Ranjit Kumar Both sons of Late Bishwanath Sah, all residents of village-Radha Nagar, P.S. and Anchal Katoria, District- Banka ….. Writ petitioners-Appellants Versus 01. The State Of Bihar 02. The Collector, Banka, District- Banka 03. Additional Collector, Banka, District- Banka 04. D.C.L.R., Banka, District- Banka 05. Anchal Adhikari, Katoria, District- Banka 06. Pradeep Kumar Singh, Revenue Karamchari, Halka No. 4/5, Katoria Anchal, District- Banka 07. Rajendra Sah son of Gaya Sah, resident of village- Radha Nagar, P.S. and Anchal-Katoria, District- Banka, presently posted as Branch Manager, State Bank of India at its Mahesh Mara Branch, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Deoghar (Jharkhand) ….. Respondents-Respondents For the Appellants:- Mr. Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, Mrs. Sangeeta Sharma & Mr. Ranjan Dr. Dubey, Advocates For the Pvt. Respondent No.3:- Mr. Dev Kr. Pandey & Mr. D.D. Pandey, Advocates For the State:- Mr. Pankar Kr. Sinha, AC to AAG-13 ---------------------------------- 12. 09.12.2011 The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 11.05.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 9522 of 2008, wherein the learned Single Judge has refused to interfere with the writ petition. The appellant has chosen to question the 2 order dated 2.2.2008 passed by the Collector, Banka in Miscellaneous Case No. 51 of 2001-02 whereby the Review Application filed by the appellant was rejected vide order dated 3.9.2001, cancelling Jamabandi No. 72. The appellant no.1 was the Karta of the joint family wherein one Bishwanath Sah was also a member. The said Bishwanath Sah was filed a Miscellaneous Case No. 3/200-01 against Jamabandi No. 15 in favour of respondent no.7 which was out of some of his land and made a complaint before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms for taking action against the Circle Officer and Karamchari. When the matter was pending the said Bishwanath sah died on 23.06.2001. Subsequently a substitution petition has been filed before the Additional Collector and an order was passed in the miscellaneous case by the Additional Collector refusing to allow the substitution petition and also dismiss the main Miscellaneous Case No. 3/200-1. Aggrieved by the same an appeal was preferred before the Collector but the same was confirmed by the order dated 23.08.2001 and the application for Review has also been dismissed by 3 the Collector on 3.9.2001. The learned senior counsel has submitted that as the substitution petition has stood dismissed, the order passed by the authorities is vitiated as the same has been passed against a dead person. Learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondents has also fairly submitted that they have filed a substitution petition, but as the same was not allowed, the appellants could have resorted to the remedy available under the law for getting the substitution petition allowed but they have not acted immediately. He, however, submitted that the order passed by the authority is null and void and it is against a dead person. Under the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that as the substitution petition is dismissed by a common order passed on 23.8.2001 and affirmed by the Collector vide order dated 3.9.2001, we are of the opinion that the order can be set aside as the same is passed against a dead person. Accordingly, the substitution petition is allowed and the matter is remanded back to the Additional Collector, Banka to substitute the 4 petitioners shown in the substitution petition as the substitutes of Late Bishwanath Sah and on hearing the matter afresh and after affording opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned. With the above observation, order of the learned Single Judge is set aside and this L.P.A. is allowed. P.K. (T. Meena Kumari, J.) (Vikash Jain, J.)