IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11028 of 2004 RAM CHANDRA RAI, Son of Late Nand Lal Rai, Resident of Village- Nirpur, Police Station Patepur, District-Vaishali ----------Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. The Director, Consolidation, Patna. 3. The Deputy Director, Consolidation, Patna. 4. The Deputy Director, Consolidation, Vaishali at Hazipur. 5. The Consolidation Officer, Patepur, District-Vaishali. 6. Harihar Rai son of Late Niraj Rai village Nirpur, P.S.- Patepur, District-Vaishali. -----------Respondents ----------- 7. 9.11.2010 This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 4.7.1999 passed by the Revision Case No. 239(A) of 1998. In the year 1976 the respondents filed an application, that certain lands recorded in their name have been amalgamated with the lands of Ram Chandra Rai, which was allowed by A/1. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 17.7.1976 was passed without notice to the petitioner. The said order dated 17.7.1976 was challenged by filing Appeal No. 98 of 1997-98. This was allowed in favour of the petitioner. The respondents submit that the said order in appeal was passed without notice to him after a gap of 22 years without any application for condonation of limitation. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the original order was ex-parte and without notice to the 2 petitioner, as such the petitioner could not know about the said order. The respondents have filed a revision application against the impugned order. The original records are before this Court. On examination of the records, it appears that the order passed by revisional authority is said to have been passed after notice to the petitioner. However, it would appear that in this case notices have been issued in a very perfunctory manner and on each occasion this Court notices one or the other party has not received proper notice. Both the parties are before this Court. In view of the aforesaid findings placed along with the original records which indicate that parties have not been properly issued notice and as such they have not been able to place their case before any authority, it is a fit case, for reconsideration by the consolidation officer. This Court is of the view that, in view of the delay both the petitioner and the private respondents are directed to appear before the Consolidation Officer within a period of six weeks of receipt of a copy of this order. The Consolidation Officer need not issue fresh notices but shall fix a date for appearance of the parties. The parties should file all documents in their favour before the 3 Consolidation Officer. The Consolidation Officer is directed to dispose of the case within a period of four months on receipt of a copy of this order. This writ application is disposed of. The original records may be return to the Consolidation Officer by S.C. 1. In the result, all orders passed in this matter be quashed. Anand Kr. ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)