Mridula Mishra, J.

1. Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel appearing for the State.

2. Petitioners, in this writ application, are bataidars of the lands of mauza Mahauda Domra appertaining to khata No. 16, Plot No. 100/52 having an area of 8 katha and 2 dhur, khata No. 14, Plot No. 59, having an area of 1 bigha 2 khata and 1 dhur, Plot No. 15, khata No. 50/18 having an area of 1 bigha 10 katha and 3 dhur. So far the claim of the petitioners that they are the bataidars and in cultivating possession of land is concerned, there is no dispute. The petitioners filed an application before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, West Champaran, Bettiah, on 23.6.1988 u/s. 48-D of the Bihar Tenency Act which was registered as Batai Case No. 25 of 1998-1999. Petitioners claimed that initially the husband of Sogra Khatoon was bataidar of the land. After his death they were inducted and bataidars, since then they are cultivating the lands and sharing crops with the land holder. The original land holder subsequently, transferred the land to the present land holder and under them also they are cultivating the land. Petitioners prayer was that they should be declared as occupancy raiyats of these lands and considering their occupancy right they should be declared as kaimidar of the land. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, West Champaran, Bettiah, by this order, dated 23.8.1988, rejected the claim of the petitioners, against which an appeal was preferred before the Additional Collector, Bettiah vide Case No. 205 of 1988-1989/86 of 1992-1993. This appeal was decided in favour of the petitioners by order, dated 20.7.1994, and the petitioners were declared as occupancy raiyat of the land in question. This order was challenged by the respondents in CWJC No. 4644 of 1995 and by order, dated 18.2.1998. That writ application was disposed of and the matter was remitted to the Circle Officer for deciding the case afresh under the amended rules of Bihar Tenancy (Amendment) Rules, 1992, by this petitioners were directed to file a fresh application, claiming their occupancy right as earlier there was no such averment in the petition filed by the petitioners. On remand petitioners filed a fresh application and the case was registered as Case No. 2 of 1997-1998. The Circle Officer, by his order, dated 23.5.1998, allowed the claim of the petitioners holding that the petitioners are occupancy raiyat of the land in question. This order was challenged by the respondents by filing an appeal which was numbered as Appeal No. 25 of 1998-1999. By order dated 19.3.1999, the Subdivisional Officer, Narkatiaganj, West Champaran, Bettiah set aside the order passed by the Circle Officer and again remanded the case to the Circle Officer for holding an enquiry whether Sogra Khatoon is in possession of excess land that allotted to be retained as ceiling unit. The Circle Officer again by order, dated 18.4.2001, allowed the claim of the petitioner, holding that petitioners are in possession of land less than ceiling unit. Respondents filed an appeal before the Subdivisional Officer, Narkatiaganj, West Champaran, Bettiah, who by an order, dated 22.8.2002, set aside the order of the Circle Officer and the appeal preferred by the respondents was allowed with a finding that the petitioner, Sogra Khatoon, had transferred several plots and lands prior to institution of a Ceiling Case No. 101 of 1975-1976 against her, as such, she possessed excess land than the ceiling unit application filed by her under sec. 48-D of the B.T. Act in this circular was no maintainable.

3. Ceiling Case No. 101 of 1975-1976 was initiated against Sogra Khatoon in respect to 34.44 acres of land, which was held by Sogra Khatoon and others. Finally the proceeding was dropped as after enquiry it was found that all those members in the family who were major on 9.9.1970 and who were land holders not in possession of the land excess than ceiling unit. This order was passed on 30.7.1984. Against th