IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6706 of 2008 MD.EKRAMUL HAQUE son of Late Saiyad Shah Azhar Hussain, resident of Village Simri P.S.Karghar,District Rohtas. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.The Joint Director,Consolidation, Patna. 3.The Asstt. Director,Consolidation,Rohtas,Sasaram 4.The Asst.Consolidation Officer,Kargahar,Rohtas. 5.Abdul Hayum 6.Mohd. Mumtaz 7.Mohd. Mustaque Ahmad, all sons of Late Saiyad Shaha Azhar Hussain, residents of village Simri P.S.Kargahar District Rohtas. ----------- 2 17.4.2009. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner has filed this application for quashing the order dated 17.7.2007, passed by the Joint Director, Consolidation, Patna in Revision case no.156 of 2001 as well as the order passed by the Assistant Director of Consolidation, Rohtas,Sasaram in Appeal case no.6 of 2001-03 dated 14.9.2001. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the revisional court has not considered this fact that the Appeal no.6 of 2001-03 is time barred and entertained the appeal, filed after 15-16 years of the order passed in his favour dated 16.1.1987. The appeal was preferred by the appellant respondent without any petition for condonation of delay. On perusal of the revision order it transpires that the revisional authority dismissed the revision preferred by the petitioner on the ground that the appellate order has been passed on consideration of the documents filed by the parties as well as the pleadings advanced by the parties. Appellate order Annexure-3 is a reasoned order where each and every aspect even the delay has been 2 considered. In the appellate order it has been stated that the appellants were not even impleaded as parfty before the court below in Case no.285 of 1983. The petitioner who has filed application before the first court has got entire land of Khata no.6 and 7 recorded in his name though it was share of his brothers. The delay has also been considered as the appellant came to know about the order when they came back on 6.7.2001 from the place they were working. On perusal of the revisional order as well as the appellate order, there is no apparent error, as such this application is dismissed. Sss/- (Mridula Mishra, J)