IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8887 of 2001 RAM BRIKSHA SAH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner :Mr. A.K. Singh Tarun, Advocate For the State :M/s Satya Deo Kumar, S.C.12 & Braj Kishore Singh, JC to S.C.12 04/ 11.9.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. None appears for the private Respondents. It appears, under the impugned order dated 5.1.2001, Annexure-8 the Deputy Director, Consolidation, who was vested with the powers under Section 35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act ( hereinafter referred to as the Act), vide notification dated 8.7.1997, has affirmed the appellate order, 31.7.2000, Annexure-6, which was recorded on the basis of the measurement taken in the light of the lands purchased by the petitioner as also the private Respondents, vide registered sale deed. In the circumstances, I do not find any merit in this application. When this order was being dictated, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that measurement as is required after local inspection in terms of Sub-section (7) of Section 10 of the Act was not made by the Deputy Director. In this connection, learned counsel for the petitioner referred to paragraph 15 of this writ application, which does not indicate as to on which date such request was made before the Deputy Director or the authorities below. - 2 - In the circumstances, I am not inclined to entertain such submission at this stage and this writ application is, accordingly, dismissed. Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)