IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16249 of 2009 1. JAMUNA MANDAL @ JAMUNA PRASAD MANDAL SON OF LATE SHRI RAMESHWAR MANDAL. 2. GANGA MANDAL @ GANGA PRASAD MANDAL SON OF LATE SHRI RAMESHWAR MANDAL. 3. RANJIT MANDAL SON OF LATE SHRI RAMESHWAR MANDAL. ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE KACHAHARI BALUA TOLA MALINIA, POLICE STATION SARSI, DISTRICT PURNIA-----PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE COLLECTOR OF THE DISTRICT OF PURNIA. 3. THE ANCHAL ADHIKARI AT BANMANKHI WITHIN THE DISTRICT OF PURNIA. 4. SHRI CHHATRI MANDAL SON OF LATE BHUBANESHWARI MANDAL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KACHAHARI BALUA TOLA MALINIA, POLICE STATION SARSI, DISTRICT PURNIA----RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02. 26.11.2009 Counsel for private respondent no.4 has filed Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 2. Heard counsel for the petitioners, State as also counsel for private respondent no.4. 3. Petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 25.11.2008, Annexure-4 passed by the Collector, Purnia in Revision Case No.44 of 2001, whereunder learned Collector has set aside the remand order passed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Banmankhi dated 2.2.2001 in Appeal Case No.10 of 1998-99, Annexure-2. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms having noticed the fact that mutation petition was filed on 4.4.1985 but the order thereon was passed on 21.3.1985 set aside the mutation order dated 21.3.1985 and remitted back the matter for fresh consideration under order dated 2.2.2001 but the learned Collector, Purnia by passing the impugned order dated 25.11.2008 has set aside the order dated 2.2.2001 and has thereby affirmed the original order, which was passed prior to filing of the - 2 - petition itself. 5. Counsel for private respondent no.4 has submitted that there may be a factual error in recording the date of the mutation order but the fact remains that the mutation has been allowed on the basis of the Panchnama filed by the parties, over which both petitioners and private respondent no.4 have put their signature, as such, there may be a mistake in recording the date of the order but such mistake may not vitiate the other contents of the order. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties, I set aside the order dated 25.11.2008, Annexure-4 passed by the Collector, Purnia and remit back the matter to the Circle Officer, Banmankhi with direction to call for the record of Mutation Case No.517 of 1984-85 and verify whether mutation petition dated 4.4.1985 was filed later than the order passed thereon i.e. 21.3.1985 and if that be so then he shall recall the mutation order and after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties pass fresh order in accordance with law. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)