IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Review. No.351 of 2009 1. PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THROUGH ITS MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER-CUM- CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Versus 1. BINOD DAS @ BINOD MISHRA S/O AND CHELA OF LATE MAHANTH RAGHUNATH DAS R/O 104, ANAND PALACE, PATLIPUTRA COLONY, PATNA 2. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PATNA 4. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, SADAR PATNA 5. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PRINCIPAL OFFICE, IN FRONT OF GPO , P.S KOTWALI, DISTT- PATNA 6. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KANKARBAGH ANCHAL, PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, TEMPO STAND, P.S- KANKARBAGH, DISTT- PATNA 7. THE BIHAR RAJYA JAL PARISHAD THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, WEST BORING CANAL ROAD, PATNA 8. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, BIHAR RAJYA JAL PARISHAD, WEST BORING CANAL ROAD, PATNA ----------- 4. 21.04.2010. The explanation submitted by the office is accepted. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-Patna Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “Corporation”) and the respondents. 3. By filing this review application the Corporation is seeking review of the order dated 20.8.2007 passed in C.W.J.C.No. 6465 of 2007 on the ground that petitioner obtained such order by suppressing the relevant fact that the lands in-question stood acquired by the State of Bihar under notification dated 14th November, 1973 and 27th March, 1957, Annexures-1 and 2. 4. Perusal of the order dated 20.8.2007 would indicate that the same was passed in presence of the counsel for the Corporation after granting opportunity to contest the claim but the Corporation did not disclose any such fact that the land stood acquired before the filing of the Title Suit No. 395/87 and the writ case. In the circumstances, there does not appear to be any error apparent on the face of the record and the order having been passed after giving opportunity to the Corporation, I do not find any merit in the review application, which is dismissed. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)