CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH, J.:–Whether a High Court exercising power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can enter into the question of ownership or title in respect of any immovable property and whether the entries in revenue records confer a title on a person(s) are the two main issues which require to be addressed by this Court in the present proceeding. Both the issues are no more res integra and have been conclusively decided by the Supreme Court in negative in a series of decisions.

2. Reference shall be made to the law laid down by the Supreme Court on these issues later after taking note of the nature of relief sought for by the petitioners and rival pleadings and materials brought on record by the contesting parties in that regard.

3. I have heard Mr. Mrigank Mauli, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners assisted by Mr. Prince Kumar Mishra and Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned Advocates. Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, learned SC 25 has assisted this Court on behalf of the State of Bihar.

4. The land, which is subject matter of dispute, has been described as Khata No. 74, Khesra No. 53 falling in Mauza- Barhari, Thana No. 481 in the District of Nalanda admeasuring 1.95 acres. The said land has been transferred by the Divisional Commissioner, Patna by way of inter departmental transfer to Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, among other lands (3.325 acres) for construction of Rajgir-Bypass Road, treating the same to be Gair-Mazarua Thikedar Parti Kadim Government land. The petitioners want, on the basis of the pleadings and photo-stat copies of the documents annexed with the writ petition and supplementary affidavits, a declaration from this Court that they have title and possession over the said land. After such declaration, the petitioners are seeking from this Court a direction for publication of notification in terms of Section 11 and Section 19 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition/Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the New Act); preparation of award in terms of Section 23 of the New Act and; for payment of compensation in lieu of acquisition of the land. The petitioners have been informed, vide Letter No. 1528 dated 26.09.2016, issued by the Land Acquisition Officer, Nalanda that the land in question was in the nature of Gair-Mazarua Thikedar and, therefore, a Government land. The said communication dated 26.09.2016 is sought to be challenged by seeking amendment through I.A. No. 01 of 2021. This is to be noted that during the pendency of this application, the Circle Officer, Rajgir has recommended to the Additional Collector, Nalanda for cancellation of jamabandi created in favour of these petitioners. The said communication dated 31.12.2020 is also sought to be challenged in the present proceeding by seeking amendment through the said I.A. No. 01 of 2021on the ground that it is impermissible for the Additional Collector, Nalanda to cancel long standing jamabandi in favour of the petitioners in a summary proceeding.

5. It is the petitioners’ case as pleaded in the writ application and other pleadings on record that by virtue of a Hukumnama executed by the then Zamindar Saiyad Shah Masud Ahmad on 24.03.1945 in favour of the petitioners’ father Bhatu Mahto, he was considered as one of the Raiyats. The land was originally recorded as Gair-Mazarua Thikedar and when the intermediaries interest vested in the State of Bihar, the ex-intermediaries filed return and declared the grandfather of the petitioners’ Bulak Mahto as one of the Raiyats and Jamabandi was created in his favour. Subsequently, his name was included in register of payment under the State of Bihar and rent was realized from him. A copy of the said Hukumnama has been brought on record by filing second supplementary affidavit on 31.10.2018. It is the petitioners’ case that rent was being realized from their father, who was put in possession for