Rajesh Shankar, J. - (1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner during argument, confines the present writ petition to the extent of the first prayer i.e. for issuance of direction upon the respondent No.2 for expeditiously disposing of the petitioner's application dated 10.02.1992 or 07.01.2000 filed in L.C. Case No. 13/1973-74 under Section 37 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Lands) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1961').
(2.) The factual background of the case, as stated in the writ petition, is that the petitioner filed a writ petition being C.W.J.C No. 1128/1992(R) before the Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court seeking quashing of the draft notification issued under Section 15(1) of the Act, 1961 by which the respondents acquired certain land of the petitioner with a finding that the same are above the ceiling limit. The said writ petition was heard along with another writ petition being C.W.J.C No. 1267/1992(R) [Ashok Kumar Jha Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.] and disposed of vide common judgment dated 28.07.1999. The operative part of the said judgment reads as under: "15. In the result, the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau at Daltonganj, respondent No.2, is directed to dispose of the petition filed under Section 37 of the Act by Vishwadeo Narain Singh (petitioner of C.W.J.C No. 1128/1992(R) after giving proper opportunity to him to place his case and evidence, if any, and to take a decision in accordance with law. Similarly, Ashok Kumar Jha, petitioner of C.W.J.C No. 1267 of 1992(R), if he so desires, may file a petition before the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau at Daltonganj, respondent No.2, raising the different grounds which he wants to raise including the facts which he has submitted before this Court under Section 37 of the Act which has also given power to the Collector to resolve any dispute in the Ceiling Act where persons were deprived of their lands without being given an opportunity to have their say in the matter. In case such a petition is filed, the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau should also give proper opportunity to the petitioner of being heard and to place the facts/evidences, if any, and pass an order in accordance with law. Since both the matters are pending for a long time, the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau will pass necessary orders within six months on the petition under Section 37 of the Act which has already been filed by Shri Vishwadeo Narain Singh, petitioner of C.W.J.C No. 1128/1992(R) from the date of the receipt of a copy of this order. The Deputy Commissioner, Palamau should also dispose of the petition, if filed by Shri Ashok Kumar Jha, petitioner of C.W.J.C No. 1267 of 1992(R) within a period of six months from the date of the filing of such petition."
(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that though he filed another application on 07.01.2000 before the respondent No.2, pursuant to the judgment dated 28.07.1999 passed by the Ranchi Bench of the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1128/1992(R) in addition to his earlier application dated 10.02.1992, yet the respondent No.2 has not passed any order in terms with the aforesaid direction contained in the judgment dated 28.07.1999.;