Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. - (1.) This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby and whereunder, the order dated 27.07.2018/06.08.2018 (Annexure-7) passed by respondent no.5 in Miscellaneous Case No. 13 of 2018-19 by correcting the name of respondent no.6 in place of Satya Narayan Modi in respect of a piece of land measuring an area of 13.20 acres appertaining to Plot Nos. 376 and 441 under Khata No. 44 of Mouza- Hethu.
(2.) The brief facts of this case as per the pleadings made in the writ petition are that the land appertaining to Plot Nos. 376, 378, 379, 380, 441, 585, 502 and 516 under Khata No. 44 of Mouza- Hethu was recorded in the name of Sk. Barkat Ali son of Sk. Rahmat Ali, in the revisional survey records of right published in the year 1935. Upon the death of Sk. Barkat Ali, the aforesaid land was inherited by Most. Basiran, Most. Koki, Wahidan, Most. Abda, Sk. Bahauddin and Sk. Sibli. The petitioners being the legal heirs and descendants of Sk. Barkat Ali, were recorded as raiyat and they are in possession over the land in question. The District Land Acquisition Officer, being the Collector under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 issued notice dated 26.07.2011 under Section 12(2) of the said Act in L.A. Case No. 06 of 2008-09 showing the name of raiyat as Barkat Ali, son of Rahmat for acquisition of a piece of land measuring an area of 11 decimals being portion of R.S. Plot No. 441 under Khata No. 44 and an Award was prepared for compensation of Rs.9,34,275/-. Further, the District Land Acquisition Officer, Ranchi in L.A. Case No. 06 of 2008-09 has issued notice amongst others to the petitioners asking them to produce documentary evidence before him on 05.06.2013. In pursuance thereto, documents have been produced, basis upon which proceeding under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure amongst others has been referred by the Circle Officer, Namkum to the Officer-in-charge Jagarnathpur Police Station, who has submitted a report as would appear that the land appertaining to Plot Nos. 376 and 441 under Khata No. 44 measuring an area of 10.50 acres and 4.02 acres was recorded in the name of Sk. Barkat Ali in the record of right and at present, in Register no. II at page252 in Volume-I, the said land was entered in the name of one Satya Narayan Modi. Before doing that, no notice has been issued to the petitioners, therefore, present writ petition has been filed.
(3.) This Court has heard the mater on 27.08.2019 and passed following order, which reads hereunder as: "It is a case where order dated 27.07.2018/06.08.2018 passed by the Circle Officer, Namkum is under challenge, by which, the order of the entry of the name of the petitioners made in the rent register by creating mutation in his favour has been cancelled. Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset has submitted that the petitioners have filed the writ petition knowing fully well the forum of appeal/revision, since impugned order has been passed without issuing any notice to the petitioners, in whose favour subsequent right have been created by passing the order of mutation by the competent mutating authority under the provisions of the Bihar Tenant's Holdings (Maintenance of Records) Act, 1973 (in short 'the Act, 1973'). Mr. Nitish Krishna, A.C to learned S.C. (L & C) II has submitted that instruction is required to be taken. This Court after hearing learned counsel for the parties and after going through the impugned order, prima facie, observed that the impugned order has been passed without issuing any notice to the petitioner. The question is when the statute confers power upon the Circle Officer/Anchal Adhikari under Section 14 of the Act, 1973, he is supposed and duty bound to act in consonance with the said provision meaning thereby if any objection against person of creating mutation has been passed and if it has been objected the requirement of issuance of notice upon the said person in whose favour an order of mutation has been passed is required to be followed, by not doing so, it is nothing but a burden upon the High Court since the petitioners are having the plea of directly approaching this Court by ignoring the forum of availability of alternative remedy of appeal/revision. In view thereof, this Court is constrained to call upon the Circle Officer, Namkum along with original record of Misc. Case No. 13 of 2018-19 on the next date of hearing for its perusal and passing appropriate order. List this case on 02.09.2019. Learned counsel for the respondents is directed to communicate this order to the concerned Circle Officer.";