Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the impugned order dated 23.3.2011 passed by the Land Reforms, Deputy Collector, Chas in Misc. Case No. 1/2010-2011 as contained in Annexure- 7 series of the writ petition.

3. Counsel for the petitioner has argued at length and at the end of the arguments the counsel for the petitioner has confined his writ petition only on the point of jurisdiction by submitting that the impugned order dated 23.3.2011 passed by the Land Reforms, Deputy Collector, Chas in Misc. Case No. 1/2010-2011 is wholly without jurisdiction and in gross violation of principles of natural justice and fair play.

4. It is submitted that the said authority has been pleased to cancel the jamabandi run in the name of the father of the petitioners for more than 20 years without hearing the petitioners. The specific case of the petitioners is that Land Reforms Deputy Collector has no jurisdiction to cancel the jamabandi which is specifically vested upon Circle Officer by the statute namely Bihar Tenant's Holding (Maintenance of Record) Act, 1973.

5. The facts of the case as submitted by the counsel for the