ORDER The prayer in this application is to quash annexure 4, the notification dated 9.1.1991 issued by the Director, Consolidation, Bihar, Patna by which he distributed the work to different Joint Directors specifying the territorial jurisdiction and their seats it is said that by a Government notification dated 29.4.1983 (Annexure 7) the State Government had decided that the seat of Joint Directors will be attached to that of the Director, Consolidation. It is admitted that the seat of the Director is at Patna. Therefore, by implication it is said that the seat of the Joint Directors will also be at Patna although they may have territorial jurisdiction over different areas of the State. By way of illustration Annexure 8 has been filed, to show that Ranjit Kumar Sinha, who was although appointed for Muzaffarpur but his seat was as Patna. It is said that similar is the case with regard to the other Joint Directors. Annexure 4 is a notification issued by the Director on 9.1.1991. As said earlier this notification prescribes the seat and the territorial jurisdiction of different Joint Directors. 2. Mr. Basudeo Prasad appearing in support of the application says that this order could not be passed by the Director in contravention to a decision taken by the State Government as per Annexure 7. 3. Mr. Government Advocate has not filed any counter affidavit. He however, drew our attention to Annexure 4 itself. He says that the Director has passed this order under section 34 sub-clause (2) delegating his powers under section 35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') after obtaining sanction from the Government. 4. Be that as it may, the sanction referred to in Annexure 4 is only in respect of exercise of powers under section 35 of the Act, which is necessary under section 34 sub-section (2) of the Act. Annexure 4 does not make any mention of sanction with regard to the shifting of the seat of Joint Directors. No provision has been shown to us by learned Government Advocate which employers the Directors to change the seat of the Joint Director. He can only delegate his powers with the sanction of the State Government for exercise of powers under section 35 of the Act. 5. No provision has been shown to us by learned Government Advocate which employers the Directors to change the seat of the Joint Director. He can only delegate his powers with the sanction of the State Government for exercise of powers under section 35 of the Act. 5. Therefore, we quash Annexure 4, so far as the fixation of the seat of different officers are concerned. We are not interfering with the distribution of the work among different Joint Directors on territorial basis as per Annexure 4. This order, however, will not stand in the way of the State Government in taking any decision with respect to the change of the seat of the Joint Directors. 6. The writ application is thus disposed of. 7. Let a copy of this order be given to Mr. Government Advocate.