IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.49 of 2007 Vinay Verma, Son of Late Singheshwar Prasad Verma, Resident of Village- D.K. Shikarpur, P.S.-Shikarpur, District-West Champaran. . . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department of Mines, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Commissioner- Cum- Secretary, Department of Forest, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Collector, Bettiah, West Champaran. 5. The District Forest Officer-cum-Deputy Director, Valmiki Tiger Project, Division-I, Bettiah, West Champaran. 6. The Assistant Mining Officer, Bettiah, West Champaran. 7. The Anchal Adhikari, Gaunaha Block, West Champaran. 8. The S.D.O., Narkatiaganj, West Champaran. . . . . Respondents. ----------- 2/ 24.06.2011 In the instant writ application, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 04.01.2003, issued by respondent no.5, District Forest Officer-cum-Deputy Director, Valmiki Tiger Project, Division-1, Bettiah, West Champaran, whereby he restrained the petitioner from carrying his mining activity on the ground that no mining can be done in the sanctuary area. The petitioner has further prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus commanding the respondent no.4 (Collector, Bettiah, West Champaran) to extend the lease hold right of the petitioner, which was for 10 years and to allow him to exercise the right for the period in question. According to the petitioner, the lease hold land belongs to one late Murli Manohar Prasad along with 200 acres of other land. The aforesaid land was declared as lease hold land. The case of the petitioner is that the aforesaid land came in the share 2 of Shailesh Narayan Sinha, one of the heirs of the Murli Manohar Prasad, who gave power of attorney in favour of the petitioner in respect of the land. The petitioner, subsequently, obtained Mining lease hold in the year 1996 for 10 years. As stated above, the petitioner was restrained from the Mining lease in the year 2003. The State Government ultimately came out with a ground that the aforesaid land in fact belongs to the Forest Department. It is the further case of the petitioner that the Jamabandi of the land was cancelled on 14.02.2003 by A.D.M. Revenue, West Champaran. The aforesaid decision was challenged in this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 5492 of 2003, which was heard analogous with C.W.J.C. NO.6110 of 2003 and other cases and by order dated 19.11.2010 a Bench of this Court set aside the cancellation of Jamabandi made by respondent no.5 and remitted the matter back to the authorities to verify whether the land belongs to the Forest Department or the Private Raiyats. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case the appropriate authorities decides that the land does not belong to the forest department, then in that case he would be entitled to his lease hold right to the balance period of three years. The petitioner has substance in submission that in case, if the authorities decide that the land does not belong to the Forest Department but belongs to the private raiyats, then he would be entitled for consideration for grant of lease hold right for the remaining period. As the matter is pending adjudication of the authorities concerned, I do not find ity expedient to keep it 3 pending any further and dispose of this writ application with the aforesaid liberty mentioned above. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)