ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel No. 1 (Ceiling). No one appears for respondent nos. 5 to 8 although notices were duly served upon them. 2. The petitioner has filed this application for quashing the Gazette Notification No.84 dated 16.2.1976 under section 15(1) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 and for further direction upon the State-respondents to exclude the lands of the petitioners from the Ceiling Case No. 2202 of 1975, i.e., the ceiling proceeding of the landholder Budhi Nath Mishra, father of Respondent No. 5 and further to cancel the Purcha issued to late father of respondent nos. 6, 7 and 8. 3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that grandmother of the petitioners purchased through registered sale deed dated 20.9.1932 land appertaining to C.S. Khata No. 84 C.S. plot no.1623, area 6 bighas 15 kathas and thereafter she came in possession and for which the revenue authorities of the State granted rent receipts also. Subsequently, after the revisional survey the said C.S. plot was divided into several plots out of which R.S. plot no. 2594 appertaining to khata no. 817 area 52 decimals was wrongly recorded in the name of one Bhim Nath Mishra, uncle of respondent no. 5. Finding the same the petitioners' grandmother filed Title Suit No.19 of 1967 against the heirs of Bhim Nath Mishra in the court of Sadar Munsif, Purnea, for declaration of her right, title, interest and possession over the suit land or in the alternative for a decree of recovery of possession of the suit land. Ultimately, the said suit was decreed by the judgment and decree dated 9.2.1982. The decree was ex parte as the defendants did not appear in the case despite service of notice. 4. The further case of the petitioners is that when their father died, they went to the Anchal office on 14.10.2004 to get names mutated where they were informed that the land in dispute had been declared surplus in the ceiling proceeding against Budhi Nath Mishra and in respect of the same Purcha was also distributed. Thereafter, the petitioners moved this Court after obtaining relevant documents learning about the entire facts. 5. Thereafter, the petitioners moved this Court after obtaining relevant documents learning about the entire facts. 5. Learned Standing Counsel (Ceiling) on the aforesaid facts submits that the petitioners have the alternative remedy available to them under section 45B of the Land Ceiling Act. 6. In the aforesaid circumstances, this writ application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the State Government under section 45B of the Act. If such an application is filed by the petitioners within four weeks from today alongwith an application for interim relief not to disturb the possession of the petitioners over the land in question, the same must be considered by the respondent-authorities expeditiously and disposed of preferably within a period of six months from the date of filing of the application. 7. It is made clear that until the application for interim relief is disposed of, the possession of the petitioners over the disputed land shall not be disturbed.