Sujit Narayan Prasad,J. - (1.) The matter has been heard through video conferencing with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby and whereunder the order dated 04.07.2012 passed by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms in Mutation Appeal No.01 of 2012-13 as also the order dated 20.02.2013 passed by the Additional Collector, Khunti in Mutation Revision Case No.15R15 of 2012 have been questioned.
(3.) It is the case of the writ petitioner that against the order passed by the original authority, the appeal has been filed after lapse of 29 years for quashing and setting aside the order passed by the original authority, which has been dismissed vide order dated 04.07.2012. The writ petitioner being aggrieved with the order passed by the appellate authority passed in Mutation Appeal No.01 of 2012-13 has preferred a revision by invoking the jurisdiction conferred under Section 16 of the Bihar Tenants Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act 1973') which confers power upon the Collector to exercise power of revision but the revision has been decided by the Additional Collector by confirming the order passed by the appellate authority vide order dated 20.02.2013 passed in Mutation Revision Case No.15R15 of 2012 and as such, the order passed by the Additional Collector, is not sustainable in the eye of law due to lack of inherent jurisdiction.;