IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13077 of 2003 PRABHU NATH SINGH, SON OF LATE RAGHUNI SINGH @ RAGHU NANDAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SHEOPUR, P.S. GARKHA, DISTRICT-SARAN……………………………...PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE COLLECTOR, SARAN AT CHAPRA. 3. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND REFORMS, SARAN AT CHAPRA. 4. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, GARKHA CIRCLE, AT P.O. AND P.S. GARKHA, DISTRICT-SARAN. 5. MAHESH SINGH, SON OF LATE YADU NANDAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SHEOPUR, P.S. CHAPRA, MUFASSIL, DISTRICT-SARAN…………………………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Mahesh Narain Parbat, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Anwar Karim, A.C. to S.C. V. For Respondent No.5 : Mr. Uday Shankar Singh, Advocate. ----------- 3. 9.9.2009. Heard learned counsel for the parties. It has been submitted on behalf of the Respondent No.5 that he has preferred Title Suit No.16 of 2006 for declaration of right ,title and for confirmation of possession as well as for injunction and demarcation of the land in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an appeal was preferred by the Respondent No.5 before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Saran at Chapra against the order of Anchal Adhikari decided in favour of the petitioner. Initially, the order of Anchal Adhikari was confirmed, however, subsequently, the aforesaid order of the Anchal Adhikari was recalled by the D.C.L.R. Thereafter the petitioner preferred Miscellaneous Case before the Collector, Saran at - 2 - Chapra, which was rejected on account of non maintainability. The order of the Collector, Saran at Chapra, was challenged by the petitioner in C.W.J.C. No.2370 of 2001 which was disposed of vide Annexure-„6‟ to this writ application and the petitioner was given liberty to challenge the order passed by the appellate authority under Section 16 of the Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Such revision was preferred and had been dismissed by the Collector, Saran at Chapra, Respondent No.2. The aforesaid order as contained in Annexure-„6‟ as well as the earlier order passed by the appellate authority is under challenge in this writ application. However, it is admitted by the parties that the Respondent No.5 has already filed Title Suit No.16 of 2006 for declaration of title over certain lands as has been discussed above. The properties, which are subject matter of the aforesaid suit include the lands which are in dispute herein. It is also admitted position that Civil Suit aforesaid is pending between the parties. In that view of above, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ application as the controversy is being decided by a civil court of competent jurisdiction. The State as well as the Respondent No.5 has no objection with regard to the same. Permission is accorded. This writ application is dismissed as withdrawn. However, it is made clear that the Civil Court concerned - 3 - shall decide the suit on its own merit without being prejudiced by the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities. P.S. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan,J)