IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14202 of 2009 BIDHYANAND YADAV SON OF LATE RAMKISHUN YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BALHA, P.S. MANSI AND DISTT- KHAGARIA. ... ... PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, MUNGER. 3. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, KHAGARIA. 4. DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND REFORMS, KHAGARIA. 5. ANCHALADHIKARI MANSI DISTT- KHAGARIA. 6. OFFICER-IN-CHARGE OF THE MANSI POLICE STATION, DISTT- KHAGARIA. 7. SMT. SUMA DEVI WIFE OF JANARDAN PRASAD YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BALHA, P.O.-MANSI AND DISTT- KHAGARIA. ... ... RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2. 29.10.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 16.9.2009 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Munger in Revenue Revision Case No.49 of 2009 where under he has remanded the Misc. Case No.1/2007-08 to the Collector of the District. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that mutation of the lands in question was made in favour of the petitioner in the year 1955. Later private respondent no.7 applied before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms and under the orders of the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, mutation of the lands in question was made in favour of - 2 - private respondent no.7 though she was not in possession of the lands in question. The order passed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms in favour of respondent no.7 was challenged by the petitioner before the Collector of the District who having taking cognizance of the challenge transferred the proceedings to the Additional Collector and the Additional Collector set aside the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms mutating the lands in question in favour of private respondent no.7. Against the final order passed by the Additional Collector, private respondent no.7 filed the instant Revenue Revision Case No.49 of 2009 before the Divisional Commissioner, Munger who under the impugned order dated 16.9.2009 set aside the order passed by the Additional Collector on the ground that the Additional Collector had no jurisdiction in the matter as in terms of the provisions contained in Bihar Tenants’ Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act,1973 hereinafter referred to as the Act it is the Collector of the District who is empowered to hear the appeal filed against the order - 3 - passed by the D.C.L.R. Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.9.2009 passed by the Divisional Commissioner on the ground that in terms of the provisions in the Act, the Divisional Commissioner has no jurisdiction to entertain revision petition in a mutation matter. Learned counsel may be right in the submission but the fact remains that the appellate order passed by the Additional Collector was also without jurisdiction in the circumstances the Divisional Commissioner has rightly set aside the order which was without jurisdiction and I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The matter is remitted back to the Collector of District who has jurisdiction in the matter. Accordingly, I direct the Collector, Khagaria to call for the records of Misc. Case No.1 of 2007-08 and hear the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after hearing both the petitioner who has filed the said Misc. Case as also the private respondent no.7. Until final order is passed by the Collector, he shall ensure that the - 4 - N.H./ parties maintain status quo on the lands in question during the pendency of the Misc. Case No.1 of 2007-08. 4. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. ( V.N. Sinha,J.)