MASTER SHARMA Vs. ADDITIONAL MEMBER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE purchasers are the petitioners with respect to proceedings under Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Areas and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The writ petitions are directed against a common order dated 3.2.2000 (Annexure 3), passed by the learned Additional Member, Board of Revenue, whereby he has allowed the four revision applications preferred by the pre -emptors, has set aside the order of the learned appellate authority, and has restored that of the learned first authority. In other words, the learned first authority had allowed the applications for pre -emption.

(2.) IT is with respect to the purchase of a portion of plot No. 721 by four different documents by three full brothers in the manner indicated hereinafter, and the claim of pre -emption has been raised by the same person whose heirs are respondent Nos. 4 to 6 herein. The sketch map provided by the learned counsel for the petitioners as part of note of submissions, and not denied by the pre -emptors, is reproduced hereinbelow :

(3.) THE four writ petitioners are directed against common orders, with common facts and law, and have rightly been disposed of by common orders by the authorities below and are accordingly being disposed of by a common judgment. The basic facts required for adjudication of the four writ petitions are admitted at the hands of all the parties. There is no denying the fact that the three petitioners are full brothers, being sons of Asharfi Sharma. The dates of purchase, and the manner of purchase are all admitted. It is equally an admitted fact that the pre -emptor is adjoining raiyat with respect to the four slice of lands. The learned first authority found that the pre -emptor is adjoining raiyat, the purchasers are not adjoining raiyats, and the four pre -emption applications were allowed. The learned appellate authority held that the pre -emptor is adjoining raiyat of the four sub -plots, but will not be allowed to succeed for the reason that the purchasers have become adjoining raiyats of each other on account of the four purchases made by the four documents of sale. He, therefore, set aside the order of the first authority and rejected the four pre -emption applications. The revisional authority has set aside the order of the appellate authority, has restored that of the first authority, and has allowed the four applications on substantially same or similar grounds as stated in the order of the first authority.