IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.512 of 2011 1. JONHA DEVI WIFE OF LATE BIRODHI PASWAN. 2. MAHANTH PASWAN SON OF LATE BIRODHI PASWAN. 3. KRISHAN PASWAN SON OF LATE BIRODHI PASWAN. 4. SHEOJEE PASWAN SON OF LATE BIRODHI PASWAN, ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHANDHARA PANAPUR, P.S. SIMRI, DISTRICT BUXAR. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION (HQR) 4TH FLOOR, CO-OPERATIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT BANK, BUDDHA MARG, PATNA. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, BHOJPUR AT AND P.O. ARRAH, DISTRICT BHOJPUR. 4. THE CONSOLIDATION OFFICER, SIMRI ANCHAL, AT AND P.S. DUMRAON, DISTRICT BUXAR. 5. THE S.D.O. BUXAR TOWN AND P.O. BUXAR, DISTT. BUXAR. 6. THE ANCHAL ADHIKARI, SIMRI ANCAHL AT AND P.O. SIMRI, DISTRICT BUXAR. 7. BHOLA MOCHI 8. TOLA MOCHI. 9. GORAKH MOCHI, 10. SHEO SHANKAR MOCHI, ALL 7 TO 10 ARE SONS OF LATE DEOHA MOCHI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHANDHARA PANDEYPUR, P.O. DULLAHPUR, P.S. SIMRI, DISTRICT BUXAR. For the petitioners : M/s Gopal Shankar, Avinash Kumar Sinha, Anil Kr. Singh No.6, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, AC to SC-17. For private respondents : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Jha Advocate. ---------------- 07. 12.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent nos.7 to 10 of C.W.J.C. No.653 of 2001, which was disposed of by this Court under orders dated 15.09.2008 after hearing the writ petitioners, as private respondent nos.7 to 10, though noticed in the said writ case did not appear to contest the prayer made therein. 2 Under aforesaid order dated 15.09.2008 this Court modified the order dated 21.11.2000, Annexure- 9 passed in Revision Case No.180 of 1999 to the extent that chak no.14 bearing plot no.64 appertaining to khata no.112 measuring 14 decimals of land was directed to be recorded in the name of Bhola Mochi and other private respondent nos.8 to 10 and 14 decimals of land bearing plot no.61 appertaining to khata no.112 of chak no.92 was directed to be recorded in the name of the petitioners i.e. Jonha Devi and Ors. Order dated 15.09.2008 was passed in the light of the order dated 31.12.1986 passed in Revision Case No.167 of 1985 which order was revised under order dated 21.11.2000 passed in Revision Case no.180 of 1999 after hearing both Birodhi Paswan husband of Jonha Devi and private respondent nos.7 to 10. Order dated 21.11.2000 passed in Revision Case No.180 of 1999 was challenged by Birodhi Paswan by filing C.W.J.C. No.653 of 2001. During the pendency of the said writ petition Birodhi Paswan died on 11.10.2006 and was substituted by his wife Jonha Devi and three others under order dated 11.09.2008. This 3 Court on account of non-appearance of respondent nos.7 to 10 in the said writ case proceeded to modify the order dated 21.11.2000 on the lines of the earlier order dated 31.12.1986, which stood modified by the Joint Director, Consolidation under order dated 21.11.2000. Had respondent nos.7 to 10 appeared in C.W.J.C. No.653 of 2001 and invited my attention to the aforesaid facts this Court may not have passed order dated 15.09.2008 modifying the order dated 21.11.2000 Annexure-9, which is an apparent error of record committed by this Court in the light of the earlier order dated 31.12.1986 passed in Revision Case no.167 of 1985, which stood already modified under orders dated 21.11.2000 passed in Revision Case No.180 of 1999. In view of the aforesaid error apparent on the face of the record, I not only recall the order dated 15.09.2008 but also dismiss C.W.J.C. No.653 of 2001. Modification application is, accordingly, allowed. Rajesh/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)