MOHAMMAD MUSTAFA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short interesting question, which has come to the surface in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is as to whether the right or claim of pre -emption of respondent nos. 5 to 8 granted by the three revenue authorities against the petitioners, who are purchasers (vendees) of the disputed land from the vendor (respondent no. 9), is justified, legal, valid or not?

(2.) THE petitioners are the original vendees in respect of the property bearing Plot No. 133 (portion) under Khata No. 8, Area 7 kathas and 5 dhurs situated in village Mainidih under Police Station Kateya, District Gopalganj. The sale deed, dated 7.5.1985, was executed by the original landowner (respondent no. 9) for a consideration of Rs. 5000/ -. The petitioners are co -sharers, as well as, adjoining raiyats on the western boundary of the disputed plot. The respondent nos. 5 to 8 had filed an application for pre -emption under Sec. 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) after depositing the consideration amount and 10% thereon before the Deputy Collector Land Reforms (DCLR), Gopalganj (respondent no. 4) under L.C. Case no. 32/1985 -86 for reconveyance of the said purchased land to them under the provisions of the Act on the ground that they are adjoining raiyats of the said plot because of possession of 14 Kathas of land bearing Plot No. 133 on the north side. They also claim that the petitioners are not entitled to any interest in the land during the lifetime of their father under Mohammadan Law and, hence, they are not adjoining raiyats of the disputed plot.

(3.) THE learned Counsel appearing for the parties have been heard. The factual profile emerged from the record has been examined and considered. The relevant propositions of law are, also, evaluated. The impugned orders of the three revenue authorities are, also, examined.