IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15058 of 2007 Dihal Mahto son of late Siya Mahto, resident of Village Khawa Chandra Tola, P.S. Medni Chowk, Old District Munger, present District Lakhisarai ---------- Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Divisional Commissioner, Munger, 3. The District Magistrate, Munger 4. The Circle Officer, Munger Sadar 5. Bachchi Devi wife of Narendra Kumar Singh resident of Belan Bazar, P.O. & District Munger 6. Sumitra Devi 7. Tetri Devi both widow of late Yogeshwar Mahto 8. Subodh Kumar @ Jhagru Mahto 9. Jawahar Mahto, both sons of late Yogeshwar Mahto, all resident of Village Sunderpur Chand Tola, P.S. Dharahara, District Munger. 10. Sarswati Devi widow of late Anup Rajak 11. Uma Rajak son of late Anup Rajak, all resident fof Village-Khawa Chandratola, P.S. Medni Chowk, district Old Munger, Lakhisarai 12. Ratan Mahto 13. Ranjeet Mahto 14. Gandhi Kumar, all minor sons of late Yogeshwar Mahto under the guardianship of Tetri Devi resident of Village Sunderpur, Chand Tola, P.S. Dharhara, District-Munger 15. Sri Marwari 16. Bijo Marwari 17. Uma Marwari, all resident of Mhawa Jhapani, P.S. Medni Chowk, Old District Munger, New Lakhisarai --- Respodnents. ------------ 2. 4.3.2009 Heard Mr. S.K. Tiwary for the petitioner, and Mrs. Kumari Amrita, learned Standing Counsel No.1 (Ceiling). These proceedings relate to Khata No. 363, Khesra nos. 958/1178, 1446/1222, 1087/1372, 1026/1360, 2239/2210, 751/736 and 1087/2562, appertaining to an area of 10.42 acres. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner had filed an application before the learned Collector of the district of Munger, praying therein that the settlement of the lands in question in 2 favour of the respondents may be cancelled, and settlement may be made in favour of the petitioner. The same was rejected by the order dated 27.8.2001 (Annexure-1), passed by respondent no.3 in Misc. Settlement case No. 27 of 1997-98 (Dihal Mahto Vrs. Raj Bachi Devi & Ors.). Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner preferred appeal before respondent no.2, which was also rejected by order dated 13.5.2005(Annexure-3), passed in Misc. Bandobasti Case No. 6 of 2001-2002 (Dihal Mahto Vrs. State of Bihar & Ors.), and the order of respondent no.3 was upheld. It appears that the parties have agitated the issue in civil court. The petitioner has already lost appeal in this Court. In that view of the matter, it appears that the petitioner has engaged himself in preferring a most frivolous writ petition, and has burdened this Court with a most unwanted writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar ,J. )