of Bihar and others, reported in 2014 (3) PLJR 281, has already held that the land tribunal has got no jurisdiction to declare the right title and possession of a party and the jurisdiction of the tribunal is very limited. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that when the tribunal had got no jurisdiction to declare the right, title and possession of the Respondent no. 3 in respect of the disputed land, the order of the D.C.L.R, Sasaram, Rohtas, is without jurisdiction and, therefore, there was no necessity for the petitioner to file an appeal before the Commissioner and this Court has got ample power to quash the order dated 12.12.2013 passed in Land Dispute Case No. 52/201314 by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Sasaram, Rohtas. He further submits that, as a matter of fact, the respondent no. 3 lost his right and title in a suit filed in the court of the Munsif, Sasaram, Rohtas, in respect of the same property against which he has preferred an appeal, which is still pending but despite of the aforesaid facts, the respondent no. 3 filed Land Dispute Case No. 52/2013-14 before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Sasaram, Rohtas and, the learned D.C.L.R, Sasaram, Rohtas, entertained the aforesaid Land Dispute Case No.52/2013-14 and declared the right, title and possession of Respondent no. 3 in respect of the disputed property.
