ORDER : 1. Reference may be made to the order dated-13.02.2019. 2. In pursuance thereto, a show cause notice has been filed by the Sub-Divisional officer, Chas and the same is taken on record. 3. This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby and whereunder following directions have been sought for:- To direct the respondents particularly the respondent nos. 5 and 6 to restrain the respondent no. 7 and 8 in illegal construction of boundary wall over Khata No. 20, Plot No. 214, measuring an area of 0.12 decimals, situated at Mouza Tetulia, within Bokaro district, in view of the fact that the Additional Collector, Bokaro, vide order dated 12.09.2018 as contained in memo no. 2076 (Annexure-8), while setting aside the order dated 10.09.2018 as contained in memo no. 1960 (Annexure-7), passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas, Bokaro and further uphold earlier order passed by him dated 28.08.2018 as contained in memo no. 1955 (Annexure-6) and same has been communicated to the Circle Officer, Chas, Bokaro and Officer In-charge of Sector-12 P.S. for necessary action. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that the dispute pertaining to the land in question, has been raised before the Circle Officer, Chas, who has passed an order on 28.06.2018 which has been questioned before the Additional Collector, Bokaro, who has come to the finding that the Circle Officer while deciding the issue, has passed ex parte order and therefore, the aforesaid order has been cancelled with a direction upon the Circle Officer, Chas to take further action in accordance with law. 5. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas, has passed an order on 10.09.2018, whereby and whereunder, he has differed with the order, passed by the Additional Collector, Bokaro by sitting upon the order passed by him, although there is no direction upon the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas by the Additional Collector, Bokaro to conduct an enquiry, rather, the direction was upon the Circle Officer, Chas. 6. The petitioner being aggrieved with the aforesaid order, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas dated 10.09.2018 has again approached before the Additional Collector, Bokaro, who has questioned the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas dated 28.08.2018 vide order dated 10.09.2018 on 12.09.2018. 7. 6. The petitioner being aggrieved with the aforesaid order, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas dated 10.09.2018 has again approached before the Additional Collector, Bokaro, who has questioned the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas dated 28.08.2018 vide order dated 10.09.2018 on 12.09.2018. 7. The concern of the petitioner at the time of filing of the writ application is that he is being harassed by the authority and while arguing the case, it has been submitted that it is a case of unnecessary harassment, as because the Circle officer, Chas has passed an order, which was passed ex parte and the same was cancelled by the Additional Collector, Bokaro but, very surprisingly, although, the direction was upon the Circle Officer, Chas to pass an order on remand by the order of the Additional Collector, Bokaro, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas has sat over upon the order, passed by the Additional Collector, Bokaro and has quashed with a direction upon the Circle Officer, Chas that although, the order, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, has subsequently, been quashed by the Additional Collector, Bokaro, but the same has been submitted to be a harassment by the authority for no fault on the part of the petitioner. 8. This Court after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner on 13.02.2019 and keeping into consideration the fact that when the order was passed by the Additional Collector, Bokaro on 10.09.2018, directing the Circle Officer, Chas to conduct an enquiry after hearing the parties and pass a fresh order, but the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bokaro in defiance of the order passed by the Additional Collector, Bokaro has passed the order sitting over the order, passed by the Additional Collector, Bokaro therefore, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas has been directed to appear in person to explain the jurisdiction as to under what authority, he has passed the order sitting upon the order, passed by the Additional Collector, Bokaro. 9. In pursuance to the aforesaid order dated 13.02.2019, show cause affidavits has been filed today, wherein, unqualified and unconditional apology has been tendered. 10. 9. In pursuance to the aforesaid order dated 13.02.2019, show cause affidavits has been filed today, wherein, unqualified and unconditional apology has been tendered. 10. It is evident from the show cause filed by the Sub-Divisional Officer in personal capacity that the factual aspect has been dealt with but, nowhere the assertion has been made regarding establishing his jurisdiction in sitting over upon the order passed by the Additional Collector or acting as a Revenue authority, therefore, the said show cause is rejected. 11. This Court, at this stage, is not concerned with the factual dispute in between the parties, since the Additional Collector, Bokaro has passed an order cancelling the order, passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas vide order dated 12.09.2018, meaning thereby the order passed by him on 28.08.2018, has been revised, therefore, now the Circle Officer is to conduct the enquiry after hearing the parties. 12. At the moment, this Court is concerned with the conduct of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas prima facie, who has acceded his jurisdiction by sitting over upon the order, passed by the Additional Collector, Bokaro not only that there is no reference in the order dated 28.08.2018, delegating any power conferred upon the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas to conduct an enquiry, rather, it is a direction upon the Circle Officer, Chas, however, the copy of the aforesaid order, dated 28.08.2018 has been communicated for information and necessary action. 13. It has been submitted by Mr. V. K. Prasad, learned S.C. (L&C) appearing for the Respondent-State that since there is a reference of a communication of the order dated 28.08.2018 to the Sub Divisional Officer, Chas, therefore, he has acted by assuming the power of the Enquiry Officer, but this submission is not acceptable to this Court, it is for the reason that the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas is an officer to the rank of Junior Selection Grade, equivalent to the Sub-Divisional Officer rank and as such it cannot be expected from the officer in the rank of the Junior Selection Grade, holding the post of the Sub-Divisional Officer that he will sit over upon the order of the higher authority by going only upon by the communication of the order, therefore, prima facie, it appear to the Court that the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas has acceded his jurisdiction. Since according to the petitioner, the Sub-Divisional officer is not a revenue authority, therefore, the matter is referred before the Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro to conduct an enquiry for taking appropriate decision in this regard. 14. This Court, so far as the factual dispute is concerned, thinks it proper to direct the Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro to look into the matter and after hearing the parties take a final decision with respect to factual aspects within period of eight weeks in accordance with law. 15. This writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.