IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4026 of 2010 1. RAM HANSDA S/O CHHOTE HANSDA R/O VILL.- LOHANGARA, P.S.- DIGHAL BANK, DISTT.- KISHANGANJ Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COLLECTOR KISHANGANJ 2. DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND REFORMS, KISHANGANJ 3. SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE KISHANGANJ 4. PRAKASH CHAND SAH S/O LATE BHAGWAN CHAND SAH R/O VILL.- KASWA MADAR GHAT, P.S. KASWA, DISTT.- KISHANGANJ 5. PHUDAN THAKUR S/O LATE YOGESHWAR THAKUR R/O VILL.- LOHANGARA, P.S.- DIGHAL BANK, DISTT.- KISHANGANJ ----------- 3. 15.03.2010. Having heard counsel for the petitioner and having perused the impugned order dated 02.01.2009, as contained in Annexure-1, I am satisfied that petitioner has not been able to make out any case of ejectment under Section 48(E) of the Bihar Tenancy Act as had he been threatened with ejectment and forcible crop cutting as was alleged by him then for such forcible crop cutting petitioner should have lodged criminal case alleging forcible crop cutting on 10.2.2008. No such case was ever lodged by the petitioner. This fact is fairly conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is, therefore, evident that share-cropping dispute which the petitioner is alleging appears to be a fitment of imagination. In the circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the matter and the writ application is dismissed. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)