IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4874 of 2010 BISHWANATH GIRI, SON OF SHRI RAMCHANDRA GIRI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE, P.O.- ARERAJ, P.S.- GOVINDGANJ, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN :-- PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. COLLECTOR, MOTIHARI, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN. 3. D.C.L.R., ARERAJ, DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN. 4. CIRCLE OFFICER, ARERAJ, DISTRICT- MOTIHARI. 5. OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, ARERAJ, P.S.- DISTRICT- EAST CHAMPARAN :-- RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, Senior Advocate. Mr. Ranjan Kumar Dubey, Advocate. Mr. Sangeeta Sharma, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Kameshwar Prasad Gupta, Standing Counsel No.5. ====== 2. 22.03.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. The Jamabandi of the lands in-question is in the name of the petitioner but under some misconception, the Collector, East Champaran under Letter No. 1122 dated 4th May, 2008, Annexure-1 directed the Circle Officer, Areraj to furnish the proposal to cancel Jamabandi Nos. 1943, 1944, 1955 and 1956 in respect of the lands in-question on the ground that Title Suit has been decreed against the petitioner. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that on the date instructions contained in letter dated 4th May, 2008, Annexure-1 was issued, neither any civil suit subject matter whereof was lands in-question stood decreed against the petitioner nor was pending before any court of civil jurisdiction. 4. Highlighting the aforesaid aspect of the matter petitioner has filed Misc. Case No. 9 of 2009 before the Collector, East Champaran in which the Collector under orders dated 4.11.2009, Annexure-7 called for a report, meanwhile, petitioner has leased out the lands in-question in favour of Air Tel Company to raise mobile tower which has also been raised but commissioning thereof is not being permitted by Respondent Nos. 3 to 5, the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Circle Officer and the Officer-in-Charge, Areraj. 5. Having heard counsel for the petitioner and the State I direct that until Jamabandi of the lands in-question recorded in favour of the petitioner is cancelled by the competent authority, Official Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 should not interfere with the possession of the petitioner or his lessee over the lands in- question. 6. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)