RAM KISHUN SAO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the present writ application, the petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order contained in Resolution dated 21.4.1993 passed by Respondent No. 3 in Case No. 378 of 1990 (Annexure -6), whereby the respondent No. 2 has allowed the revision after setting aside the order dated 2.4.1990 passed by the respondent No. 3. in Land Ceiling Appeal No. XV/8/89 -90.

(2.) THE admitted position remains that the petitioner purchased the land in question out of khata No. 8 of village Matpuri, P.O. Tarhasi, P.S. Manatu, District -Palamau by virtue of a registered deed of sale No. 1883. dated 15.2.1988 for a consideration from respondent No 8 who acquired the said land in an amicable family partition. According to the petitioner, he had purchased the aforesaid land for construction of his dwelling house and he took over the possession of land immediately after the execution of the sale -deed and started construction and collected materials for the said purpose. The respondent Nos. 5 to 7 filed an application for pre -emption under Sec. 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area & Acquisition of Surplus Land Act, 1961 (hereinafter shall be called as the Ceiling Act) on 6.12.1988 claiming themselves to be co -sharers and adjoining raiyat of respondent No. 8. The petitioner filed rejoinder to the petition filed by the respondent Nos. 5 to 7 after taking some adjournment and it was contended that the land in question did not remain an agricultural land and the same became Homestead land and as such Sec. 16(3) of the Ceiling Act was not applicable. Further contention of the petitioner in the rejoinder was that the petition was barred by limitation as the land was purchased long back on 15.2.1988 when the petition under Section 16(3) of the Ceiling Act was filed only in the month of December 1988. It was also contended that the petitioner also subsequently purchased vide registered deed of sale dated 27.1.1989, a portion of the adjacent land out of khata in question and as such he became an adjacent raiyat and no pre -emption can be available against him. The respondent No. 4 i.e. the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Sadar at Daltonganj, after hearing the parties rejected the petition of pre -emption vide order dated 29.6.1989 which is contained in Annexure -5 to this application. Then, the respondent Nos. 5 to 7 preferred an appeal before the respondent No. 3 against the order as contained in Annexure -5 which was registered as Land Ceiling Appeal No. XV/8/89 -90. The respondent No. 3 vide its order dated 2.4.1990 dismissed the appeal confirming the order passed by the respondent No. 4. The respondent Nos. 5 to 7 then preferred a Revision before the Member Board of Revenue i.e. respondent No. 2 against the order passed by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and the same Revision was numbered as Case No. 378/90. According to the Petitioner, the said Revision was time -barred and no notice was given to the petitioner before admitting the same. After hearing the parties, the Member Board of Revenue vide its Resolution dated 21.4.1993 set aside the orders passed by the authorities below accepting the claim of pre -emption of respondent Nos. 5 to 7, which has been impugned in the present writ application.

(3.) ON being noticed the respondent Nos. 5 to 7 appeared and filed counter -affidavit supporting the order passed by the Member Board of Revenue. Both parties have cited various judgments of this Court and that of the Supreme Court in support of their respective contentions.