IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15131 of 2001 SHEO PUJAN RAM Versus THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, BIHAR & ORS. ----------- 05/ 25.9.2008 Fresh vakalatnama filed on behalf of the petitioner is accepted. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State and the private Respondents. 3. Perused the impugned order dated 11.1.2000, Annexure- 1, passed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation (Headquarter), Bihar, Patna, who was vested with the powers by the Director, Consolidation, Bihar, Patna with the approval of the State Government to exercise jurisdiction under Section 35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) under notification, bearing No. 858 dated 8.9.1997. In the circumstances, the submission that the Deputy Director, Consolidation (Headquarters), Bihar, Patna had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order dated 11.1.2000, Annexure-1 under Section 35 of the Act is misconceived and is rejected. 4. So far the merits of the matter is concerned, the claim of the petitioner/ his ancestor, Ghamandi Chamar over the lands of survey plot no. 326 old is concerned, the same was rejected by the Subordinate Judge, 2nd Court, Ara under judgment dated 3.10.1974, passed in Title Appeal No. 120 of 1966-67, but on the basis of the compromise petition filed in the Court of Subordinate Judge, 2nd Court, Ara, Ghamandi Chamar was allowed 4 ½ decimals of lands in - 2 - the said plot no. 326 old on the basis of which under the impugned order dated 11.1.2000, Annexure-1 also he has been allowed 4 ½ decimals of lands in plot no. 326 old. In the circumstances, I do not see any illegality in the order impugned, Annexure-1 and this writ application is, accordingly, dismissed. Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)