IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10125 of 2011 Satyanarayan Yadav s/o Lekho Yadav r/o village Baijudih, P.S. Sono, District- Jamui. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Collector-cum- D.M., Jamui. 3. The Deputy Collector Land Revenue,Jamui. 4. the Anchala Adhikari –cum- Circle Officer,Sono Anchal,District Jamui. ----------- 2 29.6.2011 While assailing the order in Zamabandi Correction Case no.2 of 2008-09 and in particular order dated 3.1.2011 of the Circle Officer, Sono Anchal of Jamui district, petitioner asserts that the zamabandi, correction of which sought, was wrongly created in the name of private respondents as they were not the legal heirs of Anup Mahto, who, in fact, died issueless. They have no right, title or interest in the land and the zamabandi was accordingly required to be cancelled. In my opinion, the petitioner is asserting his right, title and interest in property, which question petitioner ought to have raised in a duly constituted Suit and not before the Circle Officer. The petitioner then asserts the authority of the Circle Officer . Unfortunately the petitioner himself having moved the Circle Officer, he cannot challenge the authority. The petitioner then submits that the Circle Officer had no authority to create the zamabandi. All I can say that the zamabandi does not create any title or interest. If there is a dispute of title or interest, it is for the petitioner to approach the Civil Court and get the matter settled. It cannot be done in this summary proceeding. With the aforesaid observations and direction, the writ petition is dismissed. singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J)