IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1737 of 2003 SARVODAYA ASHRAM BALWAPUR, P.O. & P.S. ASTHWAN, DISTRICT- NALANDA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, RAJENDRA PRASAD, son of late Musafir Mahto- Etora, P.S. Manpur, District Nalanda…. Petitioner. Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA through the Secretary, Gramin Vikas Department, New Delhi. 2. The Director-General, CAPART, John-v, Core-A, 2nd floor, Indira Habitated Centre, Lodipur, New Delhi. 3. The Secretary-cum- Inspector- General of Registration, Bihar, Patna.… Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Rabindra Prasad Singh, Advocate For Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: Dr. Anshuman,Advocate For Respondent No.3: Mr. Binod Kumar, A.C. to S.C.V ----- 7. 28.4.2010 The admitted position in this case is that against the cancellation of his registration, the petitioner approached the Board of Revenue claiming that the order has been passed without specific notice and without hearing and by order dated 8.1.2003, the Member, Board of Revenue has remanded the matter before the Inspector General of Registration. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the I.G., Registration, it is stated that after the remand the petitioner filed an unsigned representation and hence, the matter has not been considered. Learned counsel for CAPART also points out that there is a provision for appeal against a blacklisting order of CAPART in Circular No.147/97 - 2 - dated 18.2.1997 issued by the CAPART in paragraph No.7.7 thereof. In the above circumstances, the writ application is disposed of with a direction that if the petitioner approaches the competent authority of CAPART in terms of the aforesaid circular and the Inspector General of Registration and files an appeal and an application respectively, the same shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of filing of the same. VPS ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J. )