IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10711 of 2008 GHUTAR MANJHI SON OF KAILU MANJHI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JAGATPURA P.S. SANGRAMPUR DISTT. MUNGER. ... ... PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER CUM D.C.L.R. KHARAGPUR DISTT. MUNGER. 2. YOGENDRA KUMAR SINGH @ JOGENDRA KUMAR SINGH SON OF DEOKI MANDAL SINGH R/O VILLAGE BRAHAM ASTHAN P.S. SANGRAMPUR DISTT. MUNGER. 3. MANJU DEVI WIFE OF LATE NAVIN KUMAR MANDAL 4. GITA DEVI W/O LATE SHAMSHER MANDAL BOTH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE TILKARI, P.S. SANGRAMPUR, DISTT. MUNGER. ... ... RESPONDENTS. ----------- 4. 13.11.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also counsel for the State and private respondent nos.2 to 4. Petitioner, who claims himself to be the share cropper of the lands in question, is aggrieved by the order dated 12.11.2007 passed in Share Cropping Case No.15 of 1990-91 (Annexure-1) where under the said share cropping case has been rejected after withdrawing the proceeding from the Conciliation Board in terms of the provisions contained in Sub Section (10) of Section 48 E of the B.T. Act. Perusal of the order dated 12.11.2007 indicates that having withdrawn the proceeding, the Collector under the Act without making effort of that conciliation between the share cropper and the landlord proceeded to dismiss the share cropping dispute with reference - 2 - to the earlier Share Cropping Proceeding No.182 of 1975-76 filed by Taro Mandal against respondent no.2. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the order dated 12.11.2007 is in teeth of the provisions contained in Sub Section (10) of Section 48 E of the Act as having withdrawn the proceeding, the Collector under the Act without making any attempt for conciliation of the dispute between the original landlord respondent no.2 his vendees respondent nos.3 and 4 and the petitioner has proceeded to pass the order with reference to earlier proceeding which was between Taro Mandal and respondent no.2. Such consideration according to learned counsel for the petitioner is in teeth of the provisions in the Act. In support of such submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Rasik Lal Singh and others vrs. State of Bihar and others reported in A.I.R.1979 Pat 172. Having perused the impugned order dated 12.11.2007 as also the order sheet of the proceeding contained in Annexure-2, I am satisfied that the Collector under the Act passed the - 3 - N.H./ impugned order dated 12.11.2007 without making any effort for settlement of the dispute between the petitioner on the one hand and respondent nos.2 to 4 on the other. Accordingly, the order dated 12.11.2007 (Annexure-1) is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the D.C.L.R., Kharagpur to decide the dispute as raised in the Share Cropping Case No.15 of 1990-91 in accordance with law after making effort for the settlement of the dispute between the share cropper and the landlord and his vendee. Parties appearing before this Court are directed to appear before the D.C.L.R., Kharagpur on 7th December,2009 so that he may fix the date for conciliation and hearing the parties dispose of the proceeding afresh in accordance with law as early as possible in any case within three months of the appearance of the parties as the dispute was raised way back in the year 1991. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. ( V.N. Sinha,J.)