(1.) HEARD learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the substituted respondent No. 4. However, none appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 as also the respondent No. 5. The petitioners have approached this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the validity and correctness of order dated 30.5.1988 (Annexure -2) passed in Land Ceiling Appeal No. 81 of 1987 by the respondent Additional Collector, Saran, as also the impugned resolution dated 8.11.1990 (Annexure -4) passed in Case No. 233 of 1988 by the respondent Additional Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna, whereby and whereunder the claim of pre -emption raised on behalf of the original respondent No. 4 Har Prasad Singh, who is now dead and has been substituted by his heirs and legal representatives, was allowed, after reversing and setting aside the original order dated 25.7.1984 (Annexure -1) passed in Land Ceiling Case No. 86 of 1982 -83 by the respondent D.C.L.R., Sadar, Chapra, rejecting the claim of preemption of original respondent No. 4.
(2.) BRIEF facts are necessary to be noticed for disposal of the present writ petition. Original petitioner No. 1, who is also now dead and has been substituted by his heirs and legal representatives, as also petitioner No. 2 purchased 8 katha 12 dhurs of lands of different plots situate in three different villages, namely, Betwania, Cherihara and Kateyan through a registered deed of sale executed on 8.11.1982 from respondent No. 5. The aforesaid deed of sale was duly registered on 27.1.1983. Original respondent No. 4 Har Prasad Singh, claiming to be the adjoining raiyat, filed a petition under section 16(3) of The Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (in short 'Act') raising his claim of pre -emption with respect to vended plots, which gave rise to Land Ceiling Case No. 86 of 1982 -83 in the court of respondent D.C.L.R., Sadar, Chapra. On notice, original petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, being purchasers of the vended plots, appeared before the respondent D.C.L.R., Sadar Charpa and resisted the claim of preemption raised on behalf of original respondent No. 4. On consideration of the materials produced by the parties, claim of preemption raised on behalf of original respondent No. 4 was rejected by an order dated 25.7.1984 (Annexure -1) passed by the respondent D.C.L.R, Sadar, Chapra. The appeal preferred by the pre -emptor original respondent No. 4 was finally allowed by the impugned order dated 30.5.1988 (Annexure -2) by the respondent Additional Collector, Saran at Chapra, and revision preferred by the petitioners against the appellate order has been dismissed by the impugned resolution dated 8.11.1990 (Annexure -4). Hence, the present writ petition.
(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the substituted heirs and legal representatives of respondent No. 4 has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners in the present writ petition. He submits that in view of concurrent findings of fact recorded by the appellate authority as also the revisional authority, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. However, he has fairly conceded that the original respondent No. 4 purchased adjacent plots of land through subsequent sale deed dated 5.8.1983, but according to him, when the order was being passed by the respondent D.C.L.R., the original respondent No. 4 had become boundary raiyat and, therefore, claim of pre -emption has been allowed by the appellate authority as also by the revisional authority, after reversing the order passed by the original authority.