JUDGMENT :

Ashutosh Kumar, J.

1. A rejoinder to the counter affidavit has been filed across the board.

2. Let it be taken on record.

3. Heard Mr. Sunil Singh, learned Advocate for the appellants, Mr. Gautam Kejriwal for the respondent nos.6 to 8 and Mr. Shailendra Kumar Dwivedi for the State.

4. The appellants claim to be the bataidars, who had approached the learned Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Katihar (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as ‘DCLR’) under Section 48E of the Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885 (hereinafter referred to as ‘B.T. Act’) against threatened ejectment by the private-respondents /landlords. The DCLR in Batai Case No.745 of 2011-12 passed an order on 16.06.2012 rejecting the bataidari claim of the appellants. The aforesaid order was put to challenge in C.W.J.C. No.21216 of 2012 in which a Bench of this Court, finding that proper procedure had not been followed and the case appeared to have been ante-dated without any notice to the appellants in which an order against them was passed, set aside the aforesaid order and remanded the matter to the DCLR, Katihar to decide the matter afresh on merits with the caveat that the parties were not to be allowed to file a