IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16199 of 2009 SONE LAL RAUT SON OF SRI JIWACHH RAUT, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RAKHWARI, P.S. ANDHARATHARHI AT PRESENT P.S. RUDRAPUR, DISTRICT MADHUBANI------PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS, GOVT. OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA-1. 2. THE COLLECTOR, MADHUBANI. 3. THE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, MADHUBANI. 4. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR, LAND REFORMS, JHANJHARPUR, DISTRICT MADHUBANI. 5. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, ANDHARATHARHI ANCHAL, DISTRICT MADHUBANI. 6. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ANDHARATHARHI BLOCK, DISTRICT MADHUBANI. 7. THE DISTRICT FISHERIES OFFICER-CUM-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MADHUBANI. 8. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, DARBHANGA DIVISION, DARBHANGA. 9. ANDHARATHARHI PRAKHAND MAHILA SWABLAMBI SAHKARI SAMITEE LTD. BHAGWATIPUR THROUGH ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE SMT. CHINTA DEVI, WIFE OF HARKHU MUKHIYA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BHAGWATIPUR, POST ANDHARATHARHI, ANCHAL AND BLOCK ANDHARATHARHI, P.S. ANDHARATHARHI, DISTRICT MADHUBANI----RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02. 26.11.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State as also counsel for private respondent no.9. 2. Petitioner, who claims himself to be the raiyat of plot no.9859, appertaining to khata no.390 measuring an area of 1 bigha, 1 katha and 6 dhurs of village Rakhwari has challenged the action of the State respondents to settle the said land with private respondent no.9, a Self Supporting Fishermen Co-operative Society Ltd. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the aforesaid land is recorded in the name of his grandfather in the continuous khatian, Annexure-1. Later the land was transferred in favour of the petitioner under sale deed Annexures-2 and 2/A and appreciating the sale deed the Additional Collector, Madhubani under order dated 3.4.2002 passed in Misc. Case No.08 of 2001-02, Annexure-3 directed that the lands in question should not be settled - 2 - with anyone as Sairat of the State with further observation that if the lands are rent free then steps be taken for levy of rent from the petitioner and others who are in possession of the lands in question. Under judgment dated 11.5.2009 passed in Title Suit No.12 of 2006, Annexure-5 the title of the petitioner has been declared over the said lands and in appreciation of these facts the authorities ought not to have settled the tank in question with private respondent no.9 under order bearing letter No.494 dated 16.4.2008, Annexure-6. Even after issue of the aforesaid order Annexure-6 petitioner claims himself to be in possession of the tank in question but the State authorities and the settlee of the tank are threatening him with dispossession of the tank on the basis of Annexure-6. Learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to the aforesaid documents contained in Annexures-1, 2, 2A and 5 submits that the petitioner has again requested the District Magistrate, Madhubani under representation dated 3.9.2009, Annexure-10 to release the lands from settlement so that petitioner may continue with his raiyati rights over the lands in question. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties, I direct the Collector, Madhubani to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 3.9.2009, Annexure-10 in accordance with law in the light of the documents referred to above as also the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No.12 of 2006, Annexure-5 as early as possible, in any case within one month from today as in the said suit the Collector, Madhubani was also a party and he has not filed any appeal against the said judgment and the findings recorded in the said judgment has - 3 - attained finality. While considering the representation of the petitioner on the basis of the aforesaid documents, the Collector shall also consider the interim order passed by another Bench of this Court dated 11.5.2009 in C.W.J.C. No.18211 of 2008 as the said order also relate to the plot in the adjoining village. As the petitioner has claimed possession, which is being threatened by private respondent no.9 the Collector should consider the desirability to restrain private respondent no.9 until he decides the matter finally within one month from today. 6. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)