IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7771 of 2010 HARI MOHAN YADAV S/O LATE GOBARDHAN YADAV R/O VILL.- TELDIHA, P.O.- TIKAPATTI, P.S.- TIKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNEA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. COLLECTOR, PURNEA 3. DEPUTY COLLECTOR, LAND REFORMS DHAMDAHA, DISTT.- PURNEA 4. ANCHAL ADHIKARI, RUPAULI DISTT.- PURNEA 5. JAGAT NARAIN SAH @ JAGAT NARAIN GUPTA S/O LATE RAM SUNDAR SAH R/O VILL.- TELDIHA, P.O.- TIKAPATTI, P.S.- TIKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNEA 6. NAND KISHORE SAH S/O LATE NARESH LAL GUPTA R/O VILL.- TETARI, P.S.- NAUGACHIA, DISTT.- BHAGALPUR 7. BIPIN SAH S/O LATE NARESH LAL GUPTA R/O VILL.- TETARI, P.S.- NAUGACHIA, DISTT.- BHAGALPUR 8. ASHOK SAH S/O LATE NARESH LAL GUPTA R/O VILL.- TETARI, P.S.- NAUGACHIA, DISTT.- BHAGALPUR 9. PYARE LAL SAH S/O LATE NARESH LAL GUPTA R/O VILL.- TETARI, P.S.- NAUGACHIA, DISTT.- BHAGALPUR 10. NAND LAL GUPTA S/O LATE NARESH LAL GUPTA R/O VILL.- TETARI, P.S.- NAUGACHIA, DISTT.- BHAGALPUR with CWJC No.7802 of 2010 1. SHIV SHANKAR YADAV S/O LATE GOBARDHAN YADAV R/O VILL.- TELDIHA, P.O.- TIKAPATTI, P.S.- TIKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNEA 2. BENI YADAV S/O LATE GOBARDHAN YADAV R/O VILL.- TELDIHA, P.O.- TIKAPATTI, P.S.- TIKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNEA 3. HARI MOHAN YADAV S/O LATE GOBARDHAN YADAV R/O VILL.- TELDIHA, P.O.- TIKAPATTI, P.S.- TIKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNEA 4. BIR BAHADUR YADAV S/O LATE KAILU YADAV R/O VILL.- TELDIHA, P.O.- TIKAPATTI, P.S.- TIKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNEA 5. JANG BAHADUR YADAV S/O LATE KAILU YADAV R/O VILL.- TELDIHA, P.O.- TIKAPATTI, P.S.- TIKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNEA 6. DEEPAK YADAV S/O LATE MEGHNATH YADAV R/O VILL.- TELDIHA, P.O.- TIKAPATTI, P.S.- TIKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNEA 7. MITHILESH YADAV S/O LATE MEGHNATH YADAV R/O VILL.- TELDIHA, P.O.- TIKAPATTI, P.S.- TIKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNEA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. COLLECTOR, PURNEA 3. DEPUTY COLLECTOR, LAND REFORMS, DHAMDAHA, DISTT.- PURNEA 4. ANCHAL ADHIKARI, RUPAULI, DISTT.- PURNEA 5. JAGAT NARAIN SAH @ JAGAT NARAIN GUPTA S/O LATE RAM SUNDAR SAH R/O VILL.- TELDIHA, P.O.- TIKAPATTI P.S.- TIKAPATTI, DISTT.- PURNEA 6. NAND KISHORE SAH S/O LATE NARESH LAL GUPTA R/O VILL.- TETARI, P.S.- NAUGACHIA, DISTT.- BHAGALPUR 7. BIPIN SAH S/O LATE NARESH LAL GUPTA R/O VILL.- TETARI, P.S.- NAUGACHIA, DISTT.- BHAGALPUR 8. ASHOK SAH S/O LATE NARESH LAL GUPTA R/O VILL.- TETARI, P.S.- NAUGACHIA, DISTT.- BHAGALPUR 9. PYARE LAL SAH S/O LATE NARESH LAL GUPTA R/O VILL.- TETARI, P.S.- NAUGACHIA, DISTT.- BHAGALPUR 10. NAND LAL GUPTA S/O LATE NARESH LAL GUPTA R/O VILL.- TETARI, P.S.- NAUGACHIA, DISTT.- BHAGALPUR ----------- 02. 10.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. 2. The order impugned in the two writ application is dated 9.11.2008 and 16.4.2008 passed by the Additional Collector, Purnea in - 2 - Mutation Revision Case Nos.05 of 1996/128 of 1997 and 06 of 1996/122 of 1997, whereunder the Additional Collector has dismissed the revision case and remanded the matter to the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Dhamdaha for conducting local enquiry and to pass orders as per the provisions of law. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the two impugned orders are wholly without jurisdiction in view of the provisions contained in Section-16 of the Bihar Tenants Holdings(Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973, which empower the Collector of the district to consider the revision application filed against the appellate order passed by the DCLR. To hold the orders to be without jurisdiction notice is required to be issued to the private respondents, which is likely to take some time and in order to save time it is thought appropriate to dispose of the writ application with liberty to the petitioners to file title suit for declaration of their title over the lands in question as they are already in possession by virtue of the entries made in the revisional survey khatiyan. The findings recorded by the Additional Collector in the two impugned orders dated 9.11.2008 and 16.4.2008 shall be subject to the result of the aforesaid title suit filed by the petitioner. In the event, possession of the petitioners is disturbed by private respondents petitioners are at liberty to approach the civil court of competent jurisdiction for grant of injunction. 4. With the observation aforesaid the two writ application are disposed of. Rajesh/ ( V. N. Sinha, J. ) - 3 -