IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.396 of 2011 1. Bhagwat Mahto, Son of Late Arjun Mahto. 2. Dhanvir Mahto 3. Manvir Mahto, Both sons of Late Pritam Mahto. 4. Bindeshwar Mahto, Son of Late Ganeshi Mahto. 5. Mossamat Gauri Devi, Wife of Late Shri Parmeshwar Mahto. 6. Singheshwar Mahto. 7. Ravinath Mahto, Both sons of Late Ganeshi Mahto. 8. Lalchand Mahto, Son of Late Kanhai Mahto. All residents of Village Raichand Khutauna Tola Monglaha, PS Laukha, Present O-P- Lalmuniyan, District Madhubani. ------ Petitioners/Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Madhubani. 2. The Additional Collector, Madhubani. 3. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms (D.C.L.R.), Jhanjharpur. 4. The Sub-divisional Officer (Jhanjharpur), Madhubani. 5. The Block Development Officer, Jhanjharpur, Madhubani. -- Respondents/opposite parties ----------- 2 23.11.2011 This review application has been filed as certain facts could not be brought to the notice of the Court which are important in view of the observations of the Court passed in CWJC No. 2785 of 1986, disposed of on 18.4.1995. In pursuance to the observation of this Court in the order dated 18.4.1995, the State filed a Title Suit being 31 of 1999 in the Court of the Sub Judge-II, Jhanjharpur. This suit was dismissed on 6.2.2006 as the plaintiff had not appeared in the suit since 29.11.2002. In view of the fact that this order was not placed before this Court, it has been observed by this Court that “It goes without saying that if a suit is filed, the State respondents would have the right to move the civil court for interim 2 relief.” Infact the suit had already been filed and dismissed and as such, this observation cannot be put into effect and, therefore, this part of the order may be deleted from the main order dated 19.9.2011. By order dated 19.9.2011, this Court had stayed any further construction until final steps are taken by the District Magistrate, Madhubani in accordance with the earlier order of this Court passed in the writ application. As stated already, the earlier observation of this Court was that a suit ought to be filed for determination of the rights. The suit was filed in 1999 and was dismissed. The effect, therefore, will be that the petitioner’s title and possession have already been confirmed. The petitioner would be entitled to be reinstated on his land if, he has been dispossessed on account of the action of the State of Bihar. The application is allowed to the extent indicated aforesaid. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)