IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15731 of 2007 Ishwar Chandra Prajapati S/O Late Kharag Kumhar resident of Village Bhetaura Revenue Anchal Barachatti, P.S. Fatehpur, District Gaya ------------ Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Director Consolidation, Bihar, Patna 3. The Joint Director, Consolidation, Patna 4. Raman Yadav S/O Late Phagu Yadav 5. Budhan Yadav S/O Late Phagu Yadav 6. Hari Yadav S/O Late Nanhak Yadav 7. Budhu Yadav S/O Late Nanhak Yadav 8. Naku Pasi, S/O Chhathu Pasi 9. Etwara Pasi, S/O Trilok Pasi. No.4 to 9 resident of Village Bhetaura revenue thana and Anchal Barachatti, P.S. Fatehpur, District- Gaya -------------- Respondents. ------------ 2. 16.3.2009 Heard Mr. Ram Lallan Singh for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Counsel to Government Pleader No.11. The petitioner preferred revision application in terms of section 35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), before the learned Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna, which was transferred to learned Joint Director, Consolidation (Headquarters), Patna, for disposal, where it was numbered as Revision case No.21 of 2002. The petitioner raises a grievance against the order dated 6.9.2007 (Annexure-3), passed by the learned Joint Director Consolidation (Headquarters), Patna, whereby the revision application has been transferred to the learned Joint Director, Gaya, for disposal. In his submission, a case in terms of rule 27 of the Rules can be transferred only by the Director of Consolidation. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. It appears on a 2 perusal of the order dated 6.9.2007 that the subject matter of the revision application lies within the territorial jurisdiction of the Joint Director, Gaya, and was transferred to the court of the Joint Director Consolidation, Patna, by mistake. In that view of the matter, this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction would not like to interfere with the same. The writ petition is dismissed. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar ,J. )