SHITAL PD.CHOUDHARY SON OF SURYA NATH PRASAD CHOUDHARY Vs. USHA DALMIYA WIFE OF SHRI SHIV RAM DAYAL DALMIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS batch of 14 writ petitions arise out of a common order dated 7.8.91, passed by the learned Additional Member, Board of Revenue, whereby he has rejected the revision application preferred by the present petitioner. The same arise out of proceedings under Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Ceiling Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act '). In all the writ petitions, the purchasers are the petitioners, respondent nos. 1 to 4 are the same persons seeking pre -emption with respect to the land in question, and respondent nos. 5 and 6 are the vendors. CWJC No. 8888 of 1991 and CWJC No. 8889 of 1991 are at the instance of the same person, being the purchaser, and seek to dispel the right of pre -emption hitherto allowed by the consistent orders of the authorities below. We shall however draw the basic facts from CWJC No. 8888 of 1991, except by specific reference to another proceeding.

(2.) It is relevant to state here that respondent no. 1 (Ram Gobind Poddar) died during the pendency of the present proceeding and has been substituted by his heirs. A brief statements of facts essential for the disposal of the writ petition may be indicated. They had right, title and interest of holding no. 809, covering 5 blghas, 15 dhurs of land, in or on the outskirts of the township of Chapra. The present batch of writ petitions are with respect to 1/4th of the same, i.e. only 1 bigha, 5 katha, 4 dhurs of land. Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 had parcelled out the same in 14 equal plots, each covering 1 katha, 8 dhurs. By sale deed executed on 21.7.87, and registered on 5.10.87, respondent nos. 5 and 6 had alienated a small portion of holding no. 809 covering an area of 1 katha. 8 dhurs (approx.), in favour of the petitioner. Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 filed an application under Section 16(3) of the Act, which was allowed by the order dated 8.10.89, passed by the learned Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Chapra. He found that the purchaser (the petitioner herein) is neither a co -sharer nor an adjoining raiyat, whereas the pre - emptors are adjoining raiyats of holding no. 809 on the eastern side as well as the western side of the plot in question. He has treated entire holding no. 809 as one block of land. The appeal preferred by the purchaser was dismissed by the learned Additional Collector, Saran, Chapra, by a common order dated 30.6.90, and affirmed the findings of facts recorded by the learned first two authorities below. The revision application preferred by the purchaser in terms of Section 32 of the Act has been rejected by the impugned order. Hence this writ petition at the instance of the purchaser.

(3.) CWJC No. 8889 of 1991 is concerned with one such plot, adjoining to the one in question in CWJC No. 8888 of 1991. The sale deed of which was executed on 1.8.87 and was registered on 19.10.87.