IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1900 of 2010 URMILA PATHAK, Wife of Sri Yogendra Nath Pathak, Resident of Village- Bharha, P.S.- Riga, District- Sitamarhi :--- Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi. 2. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Sitamarhi Sadar, District- Sitamarhi. 3. The Circle Officer, Riga, Sitamarhi. 4. Ram Briksh Ram, Son of Late Suman Ram, Resident of Village- Bharha, P.S.- Riga, District- Sitamarhi :--- Respondents. ----------- 2. 04.02.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 18.5.2009 passed by Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sitamarhi Sadar in Share Cropping Case No. 57/2001-02, Annexure-2, whereunder Conciliation Board has been constituted to adjudicate the share cropping dispute between Ram Briksha Ram and Shivji Prasad Singh over the entire area of Plot Nos. 321 and 322 although the share cropping dispute is raised by Ram Briksha Ram over 1.10 acres in Plot No. 322. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that she is the purchaser of 2 acres from Shivji Prasad Singh in Plot Nos. 321 and 322. In Plot No. 321 she has purchased 0.92 decimals and in Plot No. 322 she has purchased 1.08 decimals which should have been excluded while referring the matter to the Board. Such exclusion was not allowed at the time of constituting the Board inspite of the mutation order dated 6.6.2003, Annexure-1 being placed on record indicating that petitioner has been mutated in respect of .92 decimals in Plot No. 321 and 1.08 decimals in Plot No. 322. 4. From perusal of the order impugned it appears that the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms did not exclude the lands of the petitioner from the share cropping proceeding as he was of the opinion that the sale deed does not recite the exact area of the two plots purchased by the petitioner. - 2 - 5. Having heard the counsel for the petitioner and the State, I am of the view that the Conciliation Board while proceeding with the matter should first exclude the lands purchased by the petitioner from the share cropping proceeding as Ram Briksha Ram has not made any claim of share cropping rights over the lands purchased by the petitioner and the writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)