1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. These seven writ petitions have been filed against an order, dated 16.7.1996 of remand by this Court passed in CWJC No. 2619 of 1987. The Division Bench of this court directed that the Land Reforms Deputy Collector should allow the parties to lead evidence regarding the exact nature of the land, on the date of its purchase, so as to determine whether the disputed land is covered by the definition contained in Section 2(f) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area & Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). After the order of remand the parties did not lead oral evidence. However, local inspection was conducted as directed by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector on 25.5.1998 regarding the nature of the land.

3. I would first deal with the findings of the local inspection which goes to the root of the matter. The land in question was purchased by the private respondents which appertains to plot no. 77, khesra no. 3079. The findings of the Land Reforms Deputy Collector are that west to plot no. 77 is plot nos. 65 and 75. Plot No. 75 belongs to Sudama Ojha which is adjacent to plot no. 77 an