IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17856 of 2011 Khagendra Nath Das @ Kedar Biswas S/O Late Suhanlal Biswas @ Sukhan Lal Das R/O Village- Uphrail, P.O.- Sagrath, P.S.- Kadwa, District – Katihar... ….Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Collector Cum District Magistrate, Katihar 3. Additional Collector, Land Ceiling, Katihar 4. Anchal Adhikari, Kadwa, District- Katihar 5. Smt. Urmila Devi W/O Sri Yogendra Prasad Bhagat R/O Village- Chandpur, P.S.-Kadwa, District- Katihar 6. Lachhu Soren S/O Late Radha Soren R/O Village- Barahuwa, P.S.- Kadwa, District- Katihar…. …..Respondents ………….. For the Petitioner : Mr. Uday Bhan Roy, Mr. A.K. Jha, Advocates For the State : Mr. Dherendra Kumar, A.C to S.C. 16 ………………… 3 09.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The grievance of the petitioner is that the land in question was purchased by in the year 1976 from Smt. Ansuiya Devi who has purchased it from one Ishwar Chand Bhagat who was a donee of the year 1962 from the land-holder. However, no notice was given to the petitioner or his vendor in the ceiling proceeding. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner received a notice dated 2 8.2.2010 as contained in Annexure- 3 issued by the Anchal Adhikari, Kadwa directing him to hand over the vacant possession of the land to the red-card holders who have been allotted the concerned land under Section 27 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Thereafter, the petitioner filed a Misc. Case No.07/2010-11 before the Additional Collector Land Ceiling, Kathiar, who has disposed of the same vide order dated 10.6.2011, as contained in Annexure7, holding that he does not have any jurisdiction to entertain that application. However, learned counsel for the petitioner could not show any illegality in the order dated 10.6.2011 passed by the Additional Collector Land Ceiling, Katihar, as contained in Annexure-7 as the power for consideration of reopening of the case under Section 45 B of the Act lies with the State Government and not with the Collector or the Additional Collector of the District. Learned counsel for the petitioner then seeks liberty to file an application under Section 45 B of the Act but contended in the meantime he could be dispossessed. 3 In the facts and circumstances, this writ application is disposed of with a liberty granted to the petitioner to move before appropriate authority under Section 45 B of the Act. If such application is made within six weeks from today then let the concerned authority consider the same on its own merit and in accordance with law. Let the status quo as existing today with 0.81 decimals of land of Kheshra No. 161 appertaining to Khata No. 25, Thana No. 255 of Mauja, Barahuwa be maintained till expiry of aforesaid period of six weeks or filling of an application before the appropriate authority, whichever is earlier. Sanjay-II (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)