IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2852 of 2001 1. ANAND KUMAR S/O- LATE AYODHYA PRASAD 2. UPENDRA KUMAR 3. SATYENDRA KUMAR 4 (i) RADHA DEVI, MOTHER OF DHARMENDRA KUMAR & W/O- LATE SARJU PRASAD (ii) RESHMA DEVI, W/O- DHARMENDRA KUMAR (iii)MAUSAM KUMAR MINOR SON OF LATE DHARMENDRA KUMAR (iv) MANSHI KUMARI MINOR DAUGHTER OF LATE DHARMENDRA KUMAR 5. JITENDRA KUMAR 6. MANOJ KUMAR Sl.s 2 to 6 are all sons of late Sarju Prasad. All are residents of Mohalla-shivajee Path, Jehanabad, P.S. Jehanabad, District – Jehanabad. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, MAGADH DIVISION, GAYA 3. ASSISTANT SURVEY OFFICER, GAYA SURVEY OFFICE GAYA 4. SMT. DEOPATI DEVI, W/O- RAMCHANDRA YADAV YADAV, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA CIVIL COURT, HASAIRA, P.S. AND DISTRICT - JEHANABAD ----------- 9. 13.02.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 23rd of January, 2001 (Annexure-6) passed by the Respondent no. 2, the Survey Superintendent, Magadh Division Gaya in Appeal No. 287 of 1999 allowing the appeal whereby he set aside the order dated 2.11.1999 (Annexure-5) in Case No. 457 of 1999 passed by the Assistant Survey Officer (respondent no.-3) in a proceeding under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Municipal Survey Act 1922. In nutshell, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that respondent no.-2 while setting aside 2 the order passed by the respondent no.-3 allowing the application of the respondent no. 4 passed without considering and discussing the documents filed by the respondent no. 4 and the reasonings assigned for discarding/not relying upon her documents. The respondent no.-2 accepted the consideration given by the respondent no.-3 on the document filed by respondent no. 4 without considering himself. On the other hand, respondent no. -2 erroneously considered the documents filed by the petitioners and discarded the same on a minor defect in the documents and as such, no consideration over the documents was given as per law. Accordingly, the order contained in Annexure-6, deserves to be quashed. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.-4 submits that respondent no.-3 being the Appellate Authority considered the documents filed by the petitioners in support of their appeal, the Appellate court upon such consideration was of the view that in some of the documents filed by the petitioners, the Khesra number is not mentioned. As such, the documents filed on behalf of the petitioners were rightly found not worth acceptance. Notwithstanding the rival submissions of the parties with regard to the acceptance of their 3 documents they are in agreement that the matter may be remitted back to the respondent no.-3 for passing the order afresh upon through considering each and every document filed on behalf of the petitioners as well as the respondent no. – 4 in support of their respective claim of possession over the land in question since the identity of the plot is in dispute between the parties. In the above circumstances and considering the rival submissions of the parties as well as their respective pleading in order to have appraisal and appreciation of documents filed in its correct perspective and also upon making local inspection of the land in question. In my opinion, the matter needs to be considered afresh by the respondent no. -3 in accordance with law after hearing the petitioners and the respondent no.- 4 and also upon considering the documents filed by them in support of their rival claim. Besides making the local inspection over the land in question the respondent no.- 3 while passing the order shall specifically consider the documents filed by the parties establishing the identity of the land. In view of the above, the order dated 02.11.1999 as contained in Annexure-5 as well as the order dated 23rd of January, 2001 as contained in Annexure-6 is quashed and the matter is remitted back 4 to the Assistant Survey Officer, Jehanabad for passing order in accordance with law as indicated above. This application is accordingly disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish/- (Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J)