S.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.

1. In this reference to the Full Bench it is now wholly unnecessary to recount the facts. Suffice it to notice that the controversy herein turns on the language used in Sec. 45B of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 which is in the following terms :-

"The State Government or the Collector of the district, who may be authorised in this behalf may, at any time, call for and examine any record of any proceeding disposed of by a Collector under the Act and may, if it thinks fit, direct that the case be re-opened and disposed of afresh in accordance with the provisions of the Act."

It is well to recall that at the very threshold stage of admission, learned counsel for the petitioners in challenging the impugned order under S.45B had contended that in the absence of any new material or new information on the record the case could not be reopened. Basic reliance for this contention was on the Division Bench judgement in Yamuna Rai V/s. State of Bihar, AIR 1984 Pat 195. However, the motion Bench expressed a veiled doubt about the correctness of the view in Yamuna Rais case. Noticing the significance of the