ARUN KUMAR JHA, J.:–Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The present L.P.A. is directed against the order dated 21.03.2017 passed in CWJC No. 2162 of 2013 by the learned Single Judge of this Court whereby and whereunder the civil writ petition filed by the petitioner-respondent herein has been allowed and the Collector, Purnea was directed to execute lease deed in favour of the writ petitioner in accordance with the rules within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of that order and furthermore, Memo No.2152 dated 15.10.2016 issued by the Additional Collector, Purnea was quashed.

3. Initially, in the writ petition, the petitioner-respondent herein had claimed the following reliefs:—

“(i) For commanding the respondents to immediately execute the lease deed in favour of the petitioner in respect of Bihar Government Khas Mahal land of Ward No. 11(old), Municipal survey khata No.1, Municipal survey plot No. 115/621 (ka) (kha) (part), area 15 Kattha, i.e. 24 decimals and 7½ Karies situated within the Purnea Municipality (now Purnea Municipal Corporation, Purnea) for which the petitioner has already deposited the salami amount of Rs. 2,97,123.75 in Purnea Treasury through Treasury Challan on 12.03.2003 in accordance with the order of Collector, Purnea communicated to the petitioner by the Additional Collector by his Memo No. 184, dated 14.02.2003 (Annexure- 3).

(ii) For commanding the respondents to execute the lease deed in favour of the petitioner effective from the date of its execution.

(iii) For holding that non-execution of lease deed in favour of the petitioner even after deposit of salami amount of Rs. 2.97,123.75 on 12.03.2003 is illegal, arbitrary, unjust and without any lawful justification.

(iv) For grant of any such other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is found to be entitled in the facts and circumstances of this case.”

4. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an interlocutory application bearing I.A. No.8548 of 2016 for amendment in the writ petition by adding following relief in para 1 of the instant writ petition:—

“For quashing the memo no. 2152 dated 15.10.2016, as contained in Annexure 9 to the present Interlocutory Application, issued under the signature of the Additional collector, Purnea, by which the petitioner has been asked to receive the amount of Rs. 2,97,124/- (Rs. Two Lakh Ninety Seven Thousand One Hundred Twenty Four) only from the District Nazarat/ District Revenue Section, Purnea, situated at Collector premises, Purnea. It is relevant to state here that the aforesaid amount was deposited by the petitioner in the Government Treasury, Purnea, as Salami amount as per the direction of the Additional Collector, Purnea, issued vide memo no. 184 dated 14.02.2003 for the settlement of the Khas Mahal Land on lease of Ward No. 11 (Old), Municipal Survey Khata No. 1, Municipal survey Plot No. 115/651 (ka), (kha) part area 15 Kathas i.e. 24 decimals and 7½ Karis situated within Purnea Municipality (Now Purnea Municipal corporation, Purnea) in favour of the petitioner.”.

5. Brief facts of the case, as it appears from the record, are that one Narendra Narayan Ghosh, son of late Bhola Nath Ghosh was a lease holder of the Bihar Government Khas Mahal land of Ward No. 11 (old), Municipal Survey Khata No. 1, Municipal survey plot No. 115/621 (ka) (kha) (Part), area 15 Kattha, i.e. 24 decimals and 7½ Karies situated within the Purnea Municipality (now Purnea Municipal Corporation, Purnea) and the lease was executed in his favour on 23.08.1938 for 30 years. The said Narendra Narayan Ghosh sold the subject land to great grandfather of the writ petitioner namely, Vir Narayan Chand by a registered Sale Deed No. 4210 dated 24.07.1947 after receiving payment of consideration amount. After the death of said Vir Narayan Chand, father of the writ petitioner namely, Vijay Kumar Chand applied for renewal of lease in his favour, but unfortunately, before renewal of