IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.2052 of 2008 SACHCHIDA NAND SINGH YADAV Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 10/12/2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. It is a well settled principle of law that no one can be allowed to approbate and reprobate at the same time. Plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit claiming that the suit land, though recorded as “Gairmazarua Aam Rasta”, has changed its nature and had become his own personal land. Taking this as a clue when the defendant-opposite party found that the consolidation proceeding is operating in the area including on the land in question, he came out with an application for abatement under Section 4(1)(C) of the Consolidation Act. The court below now taking into account that the consolidation scheme is going on and there is no de- notification under section 26 A of the Consolidation Act, has followed mandate of law by directing for abatement of the suit under section 4 (1)(c) of the said Act. Counsel for the petitioner now before this Court wants to take a plea 2 that since the land is Gairmazarua Aam Rasta, therefore the suit would not abate cannot proceed. This Court fails to understand as to on what basis this plea is being taken when a contrary stand had been taken by the petitioner in the court below. That being so, there is no merit in this Civil Revision Application, in as much as, there is at least no jurisdictional error in the impugned order. Accordingly, this application is wholly frivolous and is hereby dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) Abhay Kumar