JUDGMENT : CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH, J. An order dated 28.06.2021, issued by the Municipal Commissioner, Muzaffarpur Municipal Corporation was originally under challenge before this Court, whereby a direction was issued to the Town Manager of the Corporation to carry out drainage work over a piece of land admeasuirng 13 decimals bearing Khata No. 74, Khesra No. 78/497 situate at Mauza Majhauli in the district of Muzaffarpour, in purported exercise of power under Section 412 of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007. The petitioners claim that the said land belongs to them over which they have title and possession. 2. During pendency of the writ application, the Municipal Commissioner passed an order dated 21.08.2021, relevant portion of which reads as under: ^^vij lekgRrkZ] jktLo] eqtQjiqj u;s losZ [kfr;ku esa cynso flag oks lq[knso flag ds uke ls xyr 3. The subsequent order dated 21.08.2021 brought on record by way of Annexure-B to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Corporation has been permitted to be challenged by the petitioner vide an order dated 22.12.2021. 4. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the Municipal Commissioner does not have any jurisdiction either to cancel mutation or stay effect of mutation. It is accordingly the petitioners’ case that the entire exercise undertaken by the Municipal Corporation including the said order dated 21.08.2021 is wholly without jurisdiction. 5. In the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Municipal Corporation a stand has been taken that considering the records sent by the Land Acquisition Office and the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI), the Municipal Commissioner has referred the matter to the Additional Collector, Revenue, Muzaffarpur to make an inquiry and examine the entry made in the Khatiyan, whereafter a proceeding for cancellation of Jamabandi has been initiated on the basis of reference from Government Department by the Additional Collector in accordance with the provision under Section 9(4) of the Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). It is the corporation’s own case that the land has been acquired by the State Government for NHAI. 6. Mr. It is the corporation’s own case that the land has been acquired by the State Government for NHAI. 6. Mr. Kumar Kaushik, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has drawn our attention to the provision of Section 9(4) of the Act to contend that even reference by the Corporation under the said provision to Additional Collector is incompetent for the reason that according to the Corporation itself the land does not belong to it rather the same has been acquired by the State Government for NHAI. He has submitted that, in such circumstance, the Corporation cannot claim that it has any interest in the said land which could have been a basis for it to refer it to the Additional collector under Section 9(4) of the Act. 7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Corporation, on the other hand, has submitted that the Corporation intended to construct a culvert over the land in question for drainage purpose and, therefore, it has interest in the land in question within the meaning of Section 9(4) of the Act. He accordingly submits that it cannot be said that the reference made by the Corporation itself is incompetent. He has, however, not been able to defend the order of the Municipal Commissioner dated 21.08.2021 to the extent he has directed for stay of the effect of mutation created in favour of the petitioners. 8. From the subsequent affidavits filed in this case and on the basis of statements made at the Bar, it appears, however, that a proceeding has been initiated by the Additional Collector, in exercise of power under Section 9 of the Act for cancellation of Jamabandi. In the said proceeding the petitioner has appeared upon notice. 9. We need to notice at the outset the provision under Section 9 of the Act which reads as under :- “9. Cancellation of Jamabandi .—(1) The Additional Collector, either suo motu or on an application, shall have the power to make inquiries in respect of any Jamabandi, which has been created in violation of any law for the time being in force or in contravention of any executive instruction issued in this behalf. Cancellation of Jamabandi .—(1) The Additional Collector, either suo motu or on an application, shall have the power to make inquiries in respect of any Jamabandi, which has been created in violation of any law for the time being in force or in contravention of any executive instruction issued in this behalf. The Additional Collector, in whose jurisdiction the land is situated, may, after giving reasonable opportunity to the parties concerned to appear, adduce evidence and be heard, cancel such Jamabandi, dispossess the person claiming under it and deliver the possession to the legitimate owner/custodian, on such terms as may appear to the Additional Collector to be fair and equitable. (2) The jamabandi shall not be cancelled under sub-section (1) without giving reasonable opportunity to the parties, having interest in that jamabandi, of being heard. (3) Any person, having interest in a land31-03-2022 or a part thereof, of any jamabandi may file a petition in the prescribed manner for the cancellation of the jamabandi before the Additional Collector in whose jurisdiction the land or a part thereof is situated. (4) The Additional Collector, in whose jurisdiction the land or a part thereof of the jamabandi is situated, on a petition filed for the cancellation of the jamabandi or on reference from a Government Department which has an interest in the land or a part thereof or suo motu, may initiate proceedings for cancellation of the jamabandi by issuing notice to persons having interest in the jamabandi. (5) The Additional Collector in whose jurisdiction the land or a part thereof in the jamabandi is situated, after enquiry either by himself or by an officer authorized by him in this behalf, shall pass such order as he deems fit. (6)(a) An Appeal against the order of the Additional Collector shall lie with the Collector of the district within thirty (30) days of the order appealed against. (b) The Collector of the district may condone the delay in filing appeals provided he is satisfied that there are sufficient reasons for the delay. (c) The Collector of the district shall not pass any order modifying, altering or setting aside the order appealed against unless the concerned parties have been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (b) The Collector of the district may condone the delay in filing appeals provided he is satisfied that there are sufficient reasons for the delay. (c) The Collector of the district shall not pass any order modifying, altering or setting aside the order appealed against unless the concerned parties have been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (7)(a) An application for revision may be filed before the Commissioner of the Division by any person aggrieved by an order of the Collector of the district within 30 days from the date of such order. (b) The Divisional Commissioner may condone the delay in filing of application for revision provided he is satisfied that there are sufficient reasons for the delay. (c) The Divisional Commissioner may on an application made to him on this behalf or for the purposes of satisfying himself as to the legality or propriety of any order made under this Act or the rules made thereunder by an officer or authority, call for and examine the records of any case pending before or disposed of by such officer or authority and pass such order as he deems fit. (d) The Divisional Commissioner shall not pass any order modifying, altering or setting aside an order of any authority or officer unless the concerned parties have been given reasonable opportunity of being heard.”(Underlined for emphasis) 10. It is easily evincible on reading of the provision under sub-section (4) of Section 9 of the Act that the Additional Collector under the Act has jurisdiction to initiate even suo motu proceeding for cancellation of Jamabandi. We are, therefore, not inclined to interfere with the said proceeding as the proceeding under Section 9(4) of the Act, in the facts and circumstances of the case, cannot be said to be wholly without jurisdiction. 11. The question whether the Corporation has an interest within the meaning of sub-section (4) of Section 9 of the Act or not, which could have authorized it to make reference under the said provision, is a question which shall be open for the petitioner to raise before the Additional Collector in the proceeding for cancellation of Jamabandi. 12. 11. The question whether the Corporation has an interest within the meaning of sub-section (4) of Section 9 of the Act or not, which could have authorized it to make reference under the said provision, is a question which shall be open for the petitioner to raise before the Additional Collector in the proceeding for cancellation of Jamabandi. 12. We make it clear that while taking a final decision in the said proceeding under Section 9(4) of the Act, the Additional Collector shall not be prejudiced by any finding recorded in the impugned order dated 21.08.2021 and shall be obliged to decide the issue on the basis of materials and evidence placed before him irrespective of any finding/ opinion recorded in the impugned order dated 21.08.2021. 13. We are, however, of the definite opinion that the Municipal Commissioner did not have any jurisdiction in the matters of mutation in question. The impugned order dated 21.08.2021 is ex facie illegal and not sustainable. The impugned order dated 21.08.2021, to the extent it has stayed the operation of the effect of mutation in favour of the petitioners in relation to the land in question, is accordingly set aside, being illegal and without jurisdiction. 14. It is made clear that the petitioners shall be at liberty to raise all such plea that may be available to them before the Additional Collector, including jurisdictional issue. 15. The writ application is allowed to the extent indicated above.