IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10385 of 2010 VACHASPATI TIWARI, SON OF LATE ANUKA TIWARI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.O. GORARI, P.S. KARAKAT (GORARI), DISTRICT ROHTAS. ---- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE DIRECTOR, CONSOLIDATION, BIHAT, PATNA. 2. THE DIRECTOR, CONSOLIDATION, BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ROHTAS AT SASARAM 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CONSOLIDATION, ROHTAS AT SASARAM 5. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR, LAND REFORMS, BIKRAMGANJ, P.S. BIKRAMGANJ, DISTRICT ROHTAS. 6. THE CONSOLIDATION OFFICER, KARAKAT, P.S. KARAKAT (GORARI), DISTRICT ROHTAS. 7. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, KARAKAT, P.S. KARAKAT (GORARI), DISTRICT ROHTAS. 8. BINOD KUMAR GUPTA, SON OF LATE JAGDISH PRASAD 9. PRAMOD KUMAR GUPTA, SON OF LATE JAGDISH PRASAD 10.ALAKH NIRANJAN PRASAD, SON OF LATE SAHDEO SAH 11.KUBER PRASAD, SON OF LATE SAHDEO SAH 12.KRISHNA CHAND PRASAD, SON OF LATE SAHDEO SAH. RESPONDENT NOS. 8 TO 12 ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.O. GORARI, P.S. KARAKAT(GORARI), DISTRICT ROHTAS. ---- RESPONDENTS For the petitioner : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh No. 4, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gajendra Nath Ojha, A.C. to G.A. 2 ----------- 2 7.7.2010 The petitioner has challenged the order dated 10.1.2010, passed by the Circle Officer, Karakat on the ground that the Circle Officer has not considered the order of this Court in the spirit in which it was issued. The order of the Circle Officer is appealable. The petitioner would have the liberty to file an appeal before the concerned authority. The D.C.L.R. will call upon both the parties and consider the limitation application sympathetically in view of the fact that the petitioner was pursuing a legal remedy which he is entitled to and decide the case on merits. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observation. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)