The main legal point established is that the court will not entertain a writ petition if it finds that the petitioners have no valid grounds for reconsideration and that their actions amount to misusing the legal process.

Two petitioners, while invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ or order(s) for quashing of an order dated 21/2/2012 passed by the Collector, Supaul, in Miscellaneous Land Ceiling Case No. 21 of 2011. In the prayer portion the petitioners have prayed for quashing of impugned Gazette notification contained in Annexure -2 incorrectly (Annexure - 3) and order contained in Annexures – 10 & 11, whereas there is no Annexure - 11 in the writ petition. It has been pleaded that the Collector, Supaul ( Respondent No. 2) has violated the order passed in CWJC No. 5934 of 1991.

2. Short fact of the case is that long back a ceiling proceeding vide Case No. 25 of 1969-70/ 42 of 1973-74 was initiated against respondent no. 10. In the said proceeding about 174 Acres and 81.5 Decimals land of private respondent no. 10 was declared surplus and finally, gazette notification under Section 15 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation Of Ceiling Area And Acquisition Of Surplus Land) Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was published on 16/8/1981. The said gazette notification has been enclosed as Annexure -3 to the writ petition, which has been prayed to be quashed by the petitioners in the present writ petition. It is the case of the petitioners in the present writ petition that surplus land, mentioned in Annexure – 3 i.e. gazette notification dated 16/8/1981 was distributed under the Act and Parchas were issued in favour of respondent no. 5 to 9 on 3/11/1983. The petitioners have claimed that they had purchased 2 Bigha 9 Dhurs of land from respondent no. 10 through registered sale deeds executed on 23/5/1974 and 3/5/1980 and they are coming in possession over the land in question. It has also been claimed in the writ petition that though Parchas were issued, possession over the disputed land has not been delivered to others and petitioners are still in peaceful possession. The petitioners, as claimed, learnt for the first time about the ceiling proceeding and acquisition of land in dispute on 17/1/1982 and raised objection regarding distribution of land in dispute. In the writ petition it has further been stated that without considering the claim of the petitioners, on 3/11/1983 the lands were distributed to respondent no. 5 to 9 and Parchas were given, however, possession of petitioners still continues. Thereafter, as claimed, again, in the year 1983 the petitioners made fresh application before respondent no. 2 / Collector. In paragraph no. 15 of the writ petition it has been stated by the petitioners that respondents thereafter started contemplating to effect delivery of possession over the disputed land to respondent no. 5 to 9 ignoring application of the petitioners dated 4/11/1983, and thereafter, petitioners approached this court vide CWJC No. 5310 of 1983 which was taken up for hearing on the point of admission on 25/11/1983. The said writ petition was finally dismissed as withdrawn on 23/1/1984 which has been enclosed as Annexure - 5 to the writ petition. The petitioners, thereafter, as claimed, made a fresh application on 21/6/1988 before respondent no. 2 and accordingly, a case was registered vide case no. 51 of 1988-89, which was finally rejected by the respondent no. 2 vide Annexure - 7 to the writ petition. The petitioners, as per writ petition, aggrieved with the order dated 8/10/1989 passed by respondent no. 2 in case no. 51 of 1988-89 preferred a writ petition before this court vide CWJC No. 2692 of 1989, which was dismissed on 14/9/1989, which has been enclosed as Annexure - 9 to the writ petition at page no. 89.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had also approached this court vide CWJC No. 5934 of 1991, which was finally allowed by a Bench of this Court on 14/7/1999. Learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to Annexure - 1 to the writ petition, which is a photo copy