SHYAM BIHARI MISTRI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Nawal Kishore Singh, Counsel for the petitioners in the two cases.

(2.) THESE two writ petitions arise from a pre -emption proceeding under Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Ceiling Act. The petitioners, in both the cases, are the purchasers. They purchased small pieces of land being portions of plot Nos. 260 and 261 under khata No. 64 situate in village Suitha, P.S. Phulwarisharif in the district of Patna under two separate sale deeds, dated 25.03.1985 executed by one Gopal Sharan Singh and his two sons (respondents 7 -9). The two sale deeds were registered on 9.4.1985. Respondents 5 -6 raised the claim of pre -emption in respect of the two pieces of land transferred in favour of the petitioners in the two cases. They filed two separate petitions under Sec.16(3) of the Act before the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Patna Sadar giving rise to Land Ceiling Case Nos. 2 & 3 of 1985 -86. The claim of pre -emption was based on the ground that the pre -emptors were co -sharers of the transferred land and were also its adjoining raiyats. The petitioners resisted the claim of pre -emption inter alia on the ground that they were landless people and they had purchased the respective pieces of land for construction of their residential houses. The Revenue authorities found that as a matter of fact after purchasing the respective pieces of land, the petitioners had constructed their houses but allowed the claim of pre -emption by respondents 5 and 6 taking a view that neither the construction of residential houses nor the petitioners being landless was relevant to the issue of pre -emption.

(3.) THE question whether the claim of pre -emption can be raised against a landless person was examined by a Bench of this Court in Nathuni Singh Yadav V/s. State of Bihar 1997 (2) PLJR 287. The Court observed that, if the claim of pre -emption was allowed to be raised against a landless person then it would logically follow that he would never be able to acquire any land. Proceeding on that basis, the Court declined to interfere in favour of the pre -emptor. The decision in Nathuni Singh Yadav fully supports the case of the petitioners in the two cases in hand and renders the decisions of the authorities under the Ceiling Act unsustainable.