S.B. Mnha, J:

In this writ petition the petitioners Challenge the orders as contained in Annexures-12 and 13 to the writ petition passed by the respondent nos. 3 and 2 respectively.

2. The aforementioned respondents by the said orders held that rent receipts should be issued in respect of the lands in question in the names of respondent nos. 4 to 7 and directed that the rent which was being accepted from the petitioners be not so done.

3. Mr. Debi Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has raised three questions. He firstly submitted that from the application tiled on behalf of respondents as contained in Annexure-10 to the writ petition it would appear that the same was filed before the land Reforms Deputy Collector, Sadar Daltonganj He therefore submitted that L.R.D.C., Daltonganj had no jurisdiction to initiate the aforementioned proceeding at all.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State ha3 drawn my attention to the statements made in the said annexure itself where in it has been stated that the said respondents approached the Circle Officer but the Circle Officer directed that the respondents to file the application in question befo