IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12512 of 1992 1. Dilip Kumar Singh, son of Ram Janam Singh 2. Smt. Deo Bati Kuer, wife of late Jagganath Singh 3. Niranjan Singh, son of Triveni Singh. 4. Kameshwar Singh, son of Chandradeo Singh 5. Baliram Prasad Singh, son of late Mangal Singh 6. Mahadeo Mahto (dead) 6(a). Raja Kumar 7. Haribansh Singh, son of Sri Jamuna Singh, all are residents of Village_Jagdishpur, Kothia, P.S. Belsand, District-Sitamarhi ------ Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Collector, Sitamarhi 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sheohar, District-Sitamarhi. 4. The Circle Officer, Tariyani, District- Sitamarhi. 5. Sathu Paswan, son of Ritan Paswan 6. Dahaur Paswan, son of Laldhari Paswan 7. Chulhai Paswan, son of Dahaur Paswan, 8.Bhavikhan Paswan, son of Deodhari Paswan. 9. Bhola Paswan, son of Kariyak Paswan 10. Sonfi Paswan, son of Saryug Paswan (dead) 10(a) Siyaram Paswan (b) Lakhindra Paswan (c) Ranjeet Paswan (d) Innerjit Paswan (e) Lal Deo Paswan (f) Sanjeet Paswan 11. Siyaram Paswan, son of Sonfi Paswan 12. Lakhaendra Paswan, son of Sonfi Paswan 13. Kantu Paswan, son of Dasai Paswan 14. Poshan Paswan, son of Bhajan Paswan. 15. Nandu Paswan, son of Poshan Paswan( dead) 15a. Bhuttan Paswan 16. Gopal Paswan, son of Poshan Paswan (dead issueless) 17. Ram Nath Paswan, son of Sukeshwar Paswan 18. Ganesh Paswan, son of Kariyak Paswan 19. Sukhdeo Paswan, son of Janak Paswan, all are residents of Village and post Jagdishpur Kothia, P.S. Belsand, District-Sitamarhi ------ Respondents. ------------ 2 14. 26.10.2010 None appears on behalf of the petitioners. Mr. Anant Kumar Bhaskar for the respondents, and Mr. Rana Ishwar Chandra, learned Assistant Counsel to Government Pleader No.13, are present. It appears from the marginal note that this writ petition stood dismissed against respondent nos. 10(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) and 15(a). The impugned order has attained finality in so far these respondents are concerned. Allowing it to continue with respect to remaining respondents may result in inconsistent order and judgment. It further appears that substitution of the heirs of the deceased petitioner no.6 stands rejected on account of non-payment of cost to Mr. Anant Bhaskar, learned counsel for the respondents. We are informed at the Bar that some of the petitioners are dead, and steps for substitution have not been taken. We are, therefore, of the view that the writ petition as a whole has become incompetent and can not proceed further. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar,J. ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)