CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.834 OF 1991 A K Tripathi, J. In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. ------- 1. Bare Babu Prasad 2. Rajendra Prasad 3. Rama Shanakar Prasad 4. Awadh Nath Prasad All sons of late Janki Prasad, residents of Village-Nawaranga, Police Station – Gautam Budh Nagar, District – Siwan. ------------ Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Member Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Collector, Siwan. 4. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Siwan. 5. Mulkraj Singh, son of Subh Narayan Singh, resident of village - Nawranga, P.O. Sakra Via Tarwara, Police Station Gautam Budh Nagar (Tarwara), District – Siwan. 6. Name not known, wife of late Budhan Sah, resident of village Nawranga, P.O. Sakra, Via Tarwara, P.S. Gautam Budh Nagar (Tarwara), District – Siwan. ------------------- Respondents For the petitioner : Mr. Raghav Prasad. For the respondents: None. P R E S E N T THE HON`BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. None for the respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the writ application respondent No.5 has alienated the piece and parcel of land through a registered sale deed dated 18.6.2002 in favour of one Rajdhari Devi. Private respondent No.5 was claiming himself to be the adjacent raiyat based on this piece and parcel of land which related to Khata No. 36, Khesra No.640. - 2 - 3. In view of the above, the order passed by the Additional Member, Board of Revenue, contained in Annexure-4, is required to be interfered with. Not only this, the learned counsel also submits on the merit of the matter that the revisional court interfered with the findings recorded by the appellate authority without any rationale and even without considering the fact that the area of the land in question was only 1 katha 6 dhurs which was not for cultivation but for residential house. 4. Be that as it may, in view of the developments noted above and taking into consideration the evidence contained in annexure-6, annexure-4 dated 14.1.1991 is quashed. 5. The writ application is allowed. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) Patna High Court: The 12th December, 2008. (NAFR) R K Pathak.