IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA --------- Letters Patent Appeal No.522 of 2011 -------- 1. Jigyasa Devi Widow of Late Ashok Kumar Choudhary 2. Nikhil Kumar Chaudhary, Son of Late Satyadeo Nraain Choudhary. Both residents of village Binodpur, P.S. Korha ( Rautara ) and District- Katihar........... Appellants Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2. The Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna 3. The Collector, Katihar 4. The Additional Collector, Ceiling, Katihar 5. The Sub Divisional Officer at Katihar 6. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms at Katihar 7. The Anchal Adhikari at Korha within the district of Katihar.......................... .................... Respondents ----------- Counsel for the Appellants: Mr. Sidheshwar Pd.Singh Sr. Advocate Mr. Arun Kumar Ambastha, Advocate Counsel for the Respondent-State:- Mr. Pawan Kumar Mishra, Sr. Advocate- GP-22, Mr. Shashank Shekhar Jha, A.C. to G.P.22 -------------- 2 22-7-2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the State and perused the order under appeal dated 15-2-2011 whereby writ petition of the appellants bearing C.W.J.C. No. 16450 of 2004 has been dismissed after detailed discussions of all the contentions which have been recorded at 2 the beginning of the judgment running into 9 pages . Subsequently the discussions show that the point of classification of Class-4 lands into Class-5 lands as claimed by the petitioner has been considered by the writ court and it has been held that they could not adduce any material to controvert the stand of the State that the lands were actually Class-4 lands. Such stand of the State was on the basis of old inspection and corresponded to the situation very close to the appointed day i.e. 9-9-1970. The other grievance that the required publications beginning from Section -10 were not made properly after 1982 amendment in the Act has also been properly considered. It was noticed that much after that amendment in the Act the matter was disposed of by this Court and while ordering for remand this Court limited the issue only to the claim relating to the classification of the lands which the State had classified as Class-4 and the petitioners wanted the same to be classified as Class-5 lands. The Writ Court has rightly held that other issues cannot be raised again and again after limited remand by this Court. With regard to a grievance that the claim raised by 3 one Indu Devi is based on a decree of the Civil Court and, therefore, has been wrongly entertained by the Additional Collector, the discussion made by the writ court at page 19 of the judgment under appeal discloses that the Additional Collector found that alienation to have been made by the land-holder after 9-9-1970 by a registered document. It was also noticed by the writ court that the order of the Additional Collector was after due enquiry. On this issue also the action taken by the Revenue Authority is in accordance with settled law that any alienation after 9-9-1970 has to be adjusted against the unit permissible to the land-holder. We find no merit in this appeal. It is accordingly, dismissed. Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) ( Shivaji Pandey, J)