IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3539 of 2007 1. Sk. Sharif @ Md. Sharif 2. Sk. Razak @ Md. Rajak 3. Sk. Iliyas @ Nd, Illiyas 4. Sk. Muzib @ Md. Muzib, all sons of late Sk. Kare, resident of Village- Lohzar, P.S. K. Nagar, District-Purnea ---- Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through Collector, Purnea --- Respondent. -------- 2. 19.1.2009 None appears on behalf of the petitioners. Heard Mr. Rajiv Kumar Singh, learned Junior Counsel to Government Advocate No.6. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 17.10.2006 (Annexure-1), passed by the learned Collector of the district Purnea, in R.A. Case No. 136 of 2006 (Md. Sharif & others Vrs. Surya Nand Thakur & Ors.), whereby the appeal in terms of section 48(E) of the Bihar Tenancy Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been dismissed on the ground of limitation. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned Government Counsel. An application under section 48(E) of the Act was disposed of by order dated 24.12.2004, passed in Case No. 2/2004-05, by the learned Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sadar, Purnea. Aggrieved by the order, the present petitioners had moved this Court by preferring C.W.J.C. No. 2622 of 2005 (Md. Sharif & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) which was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 28.12.2006 (Anenxure-2), with the liberty to file appeal against the order of the learned Deputy Collector Land Reforms. The petitioners filed the appeal after a delay of eight months. The petitioners condonation 2 application has been rejected by the learned Collector by the impugned order on the ground that the petitioners (appellants before him) have not been able to make out a case of “sufficient cause” for condonation of delay. It appears to me on a perusal of the impugned order that the learned appellate authority has reached a possible conclusion in the facts and circumstances of the present case. It appears to me that the petitioners were negligent in pursuing the remedy of appeal. The condonation application has been rightly rejected. The writ petition is dismissed. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar , J.)