S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.

1. The grievance of the petitioner Is that the Jamabandi as was created in his favour has been cancelled at the instance of respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8 vide order passed in Mutation Case No. 140/89-90 which was also affirmed in second revision though appellate authority and 1st revisional authority decided the case in favour of petitioner.

2. Similar case relating to creation and cancellation of Jamabandi fell for consideration before the Division Bench of Patna High Court in Sitaram Choubey v. State of Bihar and Ors. 1993 (2) PLJR 255. Therein the Court held that the creation of Jamabandi or cancellation thereof is governed by the executive instruction and not under provisions of any Statute, by reason of an entry in Register-II. A person merely becomes entitled to deposit rent. An administrative order of mutation passed by the Revenue Authorities is not and cannot be a decision on the question of title.

3. In the aforesaid circumstances, as creation of Jamabandi does not confer any right and title on a person, nor cancellation of such jamabandi extinguishes such right and title, in such case, the Court should not exercise its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India as the question relating to right and title in respect of a land to be adjudicated upon in a duly constituted civil suit by the civil Court.

4. In the present case, as the impugned order passed in pursuance of Mutation Case No. 140/89-90 in no manner will affect the right and title of any individual, nor confer any such right and title over any other, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order. The aggrieved person. i.e., the petitioner or the respondent Nos. 6. 7 and 8 may move before a civil Court of competent jurisdiction, if claim right and title or possession.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

5. Petition disposed of.