Order IA. No. 4307 of 2013 The present interlocutory application has been preferred by Smt. Uma Kumari Devi and Smt. Parvati Kumari Devi, daughters of Late Smt. Lalin Madan Kumari Devi, aged about 90 years, as stated by counsel for these two applicants. These two applicants are the legal heirs of Late Smt. Lalin Madan Kumari Devi, who expired on 29th June, 1984. Smt. Lalin Madan Kumari Devi was the holder of the land measuring 61.31 acres of Khata No. 2, village Baridih, Thana No. 237 of Ratu, District-Ranchi. Some portion of the said land was in excess of permissible ceiling limit under the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus land) Act, 1961 and, therefore, after initiating Land Ceiling Case No. 349/73-74, vide notification dated 1st April, 1984, 30.30 acres out of 61.23 acres was acquired by the Government, being excess, against which W.P (C) No. 6921 of 2002 was preferred by these two applicants, i.e. Smt. Uma Kumari Devi & Smt. Parvati Kumari Devi, challenging the said Notification dated 1st April, 1984. It has been submitted by counsel for the applicants that in the order dated 17th August, 2007, in W.P. (C) No. 6921 of 2002, name of Smt. Parvati Kumari Devi was wrongly written as Smt. Parvash Kumari Devi, which appears to be a clerical error. In this writ petition contention was raised by these two applicants that at the time excess land was acquired by the Government, it should have been taken into consideration that their mother namely Late Smt. Lalin Madan Kumari Devi had two daughters (petitioners) as family and therefore, the State ought to have given three units instead of one unit. These two units for these two daughters were denied and had there been three units given, perhaps, no excess vacant land could have been acquired by the Government. There was also another argument canvassed in W.P. (C) No. 6921 of 2002 that before issuing the notification dated 1.4.1984, no notice, or opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioners (proposed intervenors in the present case) and therefore, the impugned notification dated 1st April, 1984 was stayed and the matter was remanded to the Additional Collector (Land Ceiling), Ranchi for taking fresh decision. Thereafter, the decision was taken by the Additional Collector (Land Ceiling), Ranchi, against which an appeal was preferred under Section 30 of the Act, 1961, being Ceiling Appeal No. 11 of 2009-10. Thus, it appears that there are vital interest of these two intervenors in the outcome of this public interest litigation and therefore, they are praying to be joined as party respondents. 2. Having heard both sides and looking to the facts of the case, it appears that vital interest of the applicants is involved in the instant writ petition, they being the daughters of the original landholder, namely, Late Smt. Lalin Madan Kumari Devi. They have also initially preferred writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 6921 of 2002 and thereafter, the matter was remanded to the Additional Collector (Land Ceiling), Ranchi, who, having heard these two applicants, decided the case against these two applicants, against which appeal was preferred before the Dy. Commissioner, Ranchi. 3. In view of the aforesaid facts, this interlocutory application, being I.A. No. 4307 of 2013; is, hereby, allowed and disposed of. The applicants/proposed intervenors are permitted to be arrayed as party respondent nos. 8 and 9 respectively to this writ petition. W.P.(P.I.L) No. 2880 of 2013: 4. This public interest litigation has been preferred mainly for the reason that there is a notification issued by the Government dated 1st April, 1984, declaring approximately 30 acres of land situated at Khata No. 2, village Baridih, Thana No. 237 of Ratu, District- Ranchi and this land is now transferred in favour of some land mafia, as submitted by the counsel for the petitioner. Once the land is declared surplus it cannot be settled to any person by the Government. This is the main argument canvassed by the petitioner, over and above several other arguments, including the claim that the records of the L.C. Case No. 349/73-74 was not traced out inspite of the previous order to that effect was passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 6921 of 2002 and further to take action against the concerned officials/staff. It is further submitted that though First Information Report was instituted in this matter, but, despite this, no action has been taken by the State on the basis of the First Information Report and the landed property of the Government is going to be misappropriated by the land mafias. 5. It is further submitted that though First Information Report was instituted in this matter, but, despite this, no action has been taken by the State on the basis of the First Information Report and the landed property of the Government is going to be misappropriated by the land mafias. 5. We have also heard counsel for the newly added respondents as well as the counsel appearing for the State. It has been submitted by the counsel for the respondents that this is not a public interest litigation at all. The land in question is a subject matter of Ceiling. Appeal No. 11 of 2009-10, pending before the Dy. Commissioner, Ranchi, and it is submitted by the counsel for the respondents that in fact, it is not a public interest litigation rather it involves personal interest of the petitioner in the said property, which is being denied and the order was passed by the Learned Single Judge in the year 2007 in W.P.(C) No. 6921 of 2002 itself. The present writ petition, in the nature of public interest litigation, has been preferred after several years and in fact these two ladies (newly added respondents) are fighting for their rights, since several decades, mainly on the ground that they should have been given two more units. The credentials of the petitioner has also been challenged by these two private respondents. 6. Having heard counsel for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no reason to entertain this writ petition for the following reasons:- (I) It appears that the whole dispute is regarding a portion of land, situated at Khata No. 2, village Baridih, Thana No. 237 of Ratu, District-Ranchi and also pertaining to loss of records of Land Ceiling Case No. 349 of 1973-74; (II) It appears that original holder of the land in question was late Lalin Madan Kumari Devi, who had 61.31 Acres of land in Khata No. 2, village Baridih, Thana No. 237 of Ratu, Dist.-Ranchi at the relevant time and by initiating Land Ceiling Case No. 349 of 1973-74 as per Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961, 30 Acres of land was declared as excess vacant land and a notification to that effect was also issued on 1st April, 1994 in the Extraordinary Gazette. It has been alleged by the State that a proper Notice was given to the Land holder before acquisition of the surplus land. (III) It further appears from the facts of the case that Late Lalin Madan Kumari Devi had two daughters, who challenged the notification dated 1st April, 1984, vide which approximately 30 Acres of land was declared excess vacant land, by filing a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 6921 of 2002 mainly on the ground that without giving opportunity of being heard to Late Lalin Madan Kumari Devi, no land can be declared as excess vacant land. Therefore, despite there being appellate provisions under 'The Act of 1961', on the ground of violation of natural justice, aforesaid writ petition was preferred, which was decided by the learned Single Judge finally on 17th August, 2007. Several grounds were raised by these two newly added respondents in the said writ petition and the operation of the notification dated 1st April, 1984 was stayed till a fresh decision by the Additional Collector (Land Ceiling), Ranchi in L.C. Case No. 349 of 1973-74. (IV) The Additional Collector (Land Ceiling), Ranchi had dismissed the plea of these two petitioners on 27th March, 2009 and against this decision they preferred Appeal No. 11 of 2009-10 before the Dy. Commissioner, Ranchi. Thus, Smt. Uma Kumari Devi and Smt. Parvati Kumari Devi were arguing their case before the Dy. Collector, Ranchi in their Appeal No. 11 of 2009-10 and several grounds have been raised therein, including calculation of the units to be given to the original holder of the land, namely Smt. Lalin Madan Kumari Devi, who expired on 29th June, 1984. Presently counsel for the two ladies, namely Smt. Uma Kumari Devi and Smt. Parvati Kumari Devi, submitted that they are also aged about 90 years. Thus, it appears from the facts of the case that an appeal is pending for decision before appropriate appellate authority under 'The Act of 1961'. Moreover, looking to the dispute, it appears that question about property rights is involved in this writ petition. Thus, private interest of the legal heirs of the original holder of the land is involved in this case, for which they agitated their rights initially in the writ petition and thereafter, before the appropriate authorities as provided in 'The Act of 1961'. Thus, this is not a public interest litigation. Thus, private interest of the legal heirs of the original holder of the land is involved in this case, for which they agitated their rights initially in the writ petition and thereafter, before the appropriate authorities as provided in 'The Act of 1961'. Thus, this is not a public interest litigation. The rights of these two applicants of the present Interlocutory Application, namely Smt. Uma Kumari Devi and Smt. Parvati Kumari Devi as well as the rights of the State of Jharkhand are yet to be decided by the Appellate authority in the appeal under Section 30 of 'The Act of 1961'. 7. In these set of circumstances, we see no reason to entertain this public interest litigation. As the matter is already subjudice, we are not inclined to make any observation regarding merits and de-merits of the case and we request the Dy. Collector to decide the appeal on its own merit and on the basis of the evidence on record, as early as possible and practicable. 8. This Public Interest Litigation is, hereby, dismissed.