IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5803 of 2002 1. HARIHAR KUWAR 2. SUDARSHAN KUWAR 3. BHARAT KUWAR ALL SONS OF SHEOPUJAN KUWAR AND ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DUMRI, POLICE STATION SIMARI, DISTRICT – BUXAR 4. MOST. DILBASO KUWAR, W/O- LATE SIDESHWAR KUWAR, R/O- VILLAGE DUMRI, POLICE STATION- SIMRI, DISTRICT - BUXAR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BUXAR 3. RADHESHYAM KUWAR, S/O- BODHI KUWAR R/O- VILLAGE AND P.O.- DUMARI, POLICE STATION- SIMARI, DISTRICT – BUXAR 4. ANUJ KUMAR LAL 5. KAMESHWAR LAL BOTH ARE SONS OF KRISHNA KUMAR LAL AND R/O VILLAGE CHAKNI, P.O.- VIA BHOJPUR, P.S.- SIMARI, DISTRICT – BUXAR 6. NATHUNI YADAV 7. RADHA KRISHNA YADAV BOTH SONS OF SITARAM YADAV 8. JAG NARAYAN YADAV, S/O- LATE SHRI KRISHNA YADAV 9. DADAN YADAV, S/O- LATE BUCHUL YADAV, R/O- VILLAGE CHAKANI, VIA BHOJPUR, POLICE STATION – SIMARI, DISTRICT - BUXAR ----------- 11. 10.02.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. No one appears on behalf of respondent nos. 3 to 9. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioners bringing on record the order dated 21.07.1995 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 5630 of 1993 by this court and order dated 01.03.1993/3.03.1993 passed in Mutation Revision Case No. 3 of 1993/5 of 1992-93 annexed as Annexure-1, 1/A to this petition. Petitioners are aggrieved by order dated 12.10.2001 passed by the respondent no. 2 in Case No. 2 83 of 1997 arising out of a mutation proceeding. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that against the appellate order dated 27.01.1992 passed in Mutation Appeal No. 21/1991-92, the respondents had filed a revision vide Revision Case No. 3 of 1993/5 of 1992-93 which was disposed of by the Additional Collector, Buxar exercising the power of revision as per its order dated 01.03.1993. The petitioners herein assailed the aforesaid order in this court vide C.W.J.C. No. 5630 of 1993. The writ application was allowed by order dated 21.07.1995 quashing the order passed by the Additional Collector dated 1.03.1993/3.3.1993 setting aside the order of Additional Collector annexed as Annexure - 1/1-A and remitted the matter to the Collector, Buxar to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after hearing the parties since after the amendment of the Bihar Tenants Holding (Maintenance of Record) Act 1973 has stood amended by Act 3 of 2003 . The Collector of the district is only empowered to exercise the power of revision under section 16 of the said Act. It is further submitted that the petitioners filed an application for calling of the records of the revision application filed by the respondents for its disposal as per the order passed by the High Court vide order dated 21.07.1995 in C.W.J.C. 3 No. 5680 of 1993. The said application was, however, registered by the respondent no. 2 as a separate case no. 83 of 1997 and the said application was dismissed by impunged order dated 12.10.2001 as contained in Annexure-2 without appreciating that the application was filed merely for calling the original records and the said application was not any revision application filed by the petitioners. As such, it is submitted that the said order deserves to be quashed with further direction that the Revision Application no. 3 of 1993/5 of 1992-93 be disposed of as directed by this court as per order contained in Annexure-1 to the counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the State submits that in the interest of justice, let the matter be remitted back to the respondent no. 2 for disposing of the aforesaid revision cases in accordance with law as per the order of this court. Considering the submissions of the parties it appears that as per order dated 21.07.1995 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 5630 of 1993 respondent- Collector, Buxar was required to pass order in accordance with law on the Revision Case No. 3 of 1993/5 of 1992-93 filed by the respondents. The application filed by the petitioners for calling the records was erroneously registered as a separate Revision Case No. 83 of 1997. 4 Accordingly, the order dated 12.10.2001 is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the respondent no. -2 for passing the orders over the aforesaid revision case in accordance with law after hearing the parties as directed by this court earlier, as mentioned above. The application is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above. Jagdish/- (Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J)