1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned junior counsel to Standing Counsel (Ceiling).

2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 15.2.2003 (Annexure 11), passed by the learned Additional Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna, in Case No. 42 of 1999 (Sunil Kumar vs. State of Bihar & Ors.), whereby he has rejected the revision application of the petitioners under Section 32 of the Land Ceiling Act on the ground that the final order has already been passed by the Collector.

3. On a perusal of the impugned order and consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it appears to me that the learned Additional Member has committed errors apparent on the face of the record by assigning a restricted and narrow scope of jurisdiction under Section 32 of the Act, and, secondly, by establishing parity between Sections 32 and 45B of the Act. The scope and content of the two provisions are fundamentally different. The scope of Section 32 fell for the consideration of this Court in the case of Kamleshwar Prasad Yadav vs. State of Bihar & Ors., the judgment of which has since been summarily reported in 1986 PLJR NOC (AB)23 (Kamleshwar Pr