Judgment R.N. Sahay, J. 1. In the year 1978 petitioners Dashrath Prasad Singh and Hira Prasad Singh filed application under section 48E of the B.T. Act. Petitioner's Batai right was recognised by the authorities. Petitioner Dashrath Prasad Singh was given Bataidari right in respect of 2.85 acres of land of village Nirpur, appertaining to khata no. 454 plot No. 315. Petitioner Hira Prasad Singh was recognised Bataidari right with respect to 2.86 acres in the same village in respect of same khata and same plot. 2. The recorded tenant filed appeal against the order of the Batai Board dated 4.11.1978 in Case Nos. 400 and 401 of 1978-79 whereby the petitioners were recognised as Bataidars. The appeal filed by Ram Krishna Prasad was dismissed vide Annexure-3. 3. Petitioners' land was vested in the State of Bihar under section 15(1) of the Act. The petitioners made an application under section 22 of the Ceiling Act for settlement of the lands in respect of which the petitioners Bataidari right has been recognised by the State. There was enquiry and spot verification vide Annexure-4. The competent authority recommended for issuance of Green Card to the petitioners and the recommendation was forwarded to the Collector for necessary orders. Thereafter, Green Cards were issued to the petitioners (Annexure-5 and 5/a). 4. It is stated that the Land Ceiling Case No.68 of 1973-74 was commenced against Beer Narain Chand in which 800 acres of lands were declared surplus. One Ram Krishna Prasad had filed objection in the land ceiling case which was rejected. His appeal was also dismissed. Thereafter he filed Misc. Ceiling Case No. 662 of 1990-91 for reopening the ceiling case and exemption of his land from the notification under section 15(2) of the Ceiling Act. In the same application he also prayed for cancellation of the order under section 22 of the Ceiling Act by which the petitioners were issued Green Cards. In that application the case of Ram Krishna Prasad was that he had purchased lands mentioned in Schedule-1 of his petition from Ish Kumar Virmani and Late Shiv Kumar Virmani, both sons of Late Amir Chand Virmani by registered sale deed dated 26.4.1975. 5. The Collector reopened the proceeding on the application of Ram Krishna Prasad (Respondent No.7). In that application the case of Ram Krishna Prasad was that he had purchased lands mentioned in Schedule-1 of his petition from Ish Kumar Virmani and Late Shiv Kumar Virmani, both sons of Late Amir Chand Virmani by registered sale deed dated 26.4.1975. 5. The Collector reopened the proceeding on the application of Ram Krishna Prasad (Respondent No.7). The Collector by the impugned order (Annexure-1) observed that the petitioners had obtained order under section 48E of the B.T. Act by playing fraud on the court. The Collector held that the Green Card issued on the basis of order under B.T. Act in bad in law and he accordingly cancelled the Green Cards. At the same time he rejected the claim of respondent no. 7. 6. Since the claim of the respondent no. 7 was rejected on merits, there was no necessity of cancelling the Green Cards issued to the petitioners. Secondly, the Collector under the Ceiling Act had no power to set aside the order under section 48E of the Act recognising the petitioners as Bataidar in the disputed lands. Being aggrieved by the said order the respondent no.7 had not filed any application before the competent authority to recall the order passed in the year 1978. The Collector under the Ceiling Act had, therefore, no jurisdiction to set aside the order. The order of the Commissioner dismissing the appeal of the petitioners (Annexure-2) is also illegal for the same reason. 7. This writ application is accordingly allowed. The order of the Collector (Annexure-1) and the order of the Commissioner (Annexure-2) are hereby quashed There shall be no order as to costs.