IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1256 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10152 of 2005 With Interlocutory Application No. 6201 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No.1256 of 2011. ====================================================== Satish Prasad Singh, son of Biranchi Singh, resident of Village - Barsanda, P.O. - Gouravdih, Police Station - Sangrampur, District-Munger. …… Respondent 1st party ….. Appellant... .... Appellant Versus 1. Brahmdeo Singh, son of Late Chhote Lal Singh, Resident of village- Barsanda, P.O. –Gouravdih, Police Station - Sangrampur, District- Munger. ….Petitioner …. Respondent 2. Sudhir Singh. 3. Lalan Kumar Singh Both son of Late Bageshwar Singh. 4. Mauleshwari Singh. 5. Sivendra Singh. Both son of Late Maha Pratap Singh All resident of Vill.+P.O. Gouravdih, P.S-Sangrampur, Dist -Munger. (Vendors)….Respondent 2nd party…..Respondents. 6. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Haveli Kharagpur, Haveli Kharagpur, District - Munger. 7. The Collector, Munger. The Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna through its Member. 8. The state of Bihar through the Secretary, Land Reforms Department, Bihar, Patna. …..Respondents 3rd party…….Respondents. ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Md. Najmul Hodda, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Ms. Kumari Amrita GP10 and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, AC to GP 10. ====================================================== Patna High Court LPA No.1256 of 2011 (2) dt.09-09-2011 2 / 3 2 CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2 09-09-2011 Re. Interlocutory Application No. 6201 of 2011. The delay of 37 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Re. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1256 of 2011. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 18th April 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No. 10152 of 2005, the respondent no. 1, the pre-emptor, has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. The matter at dispute is the sale of four parcels of land by the owners - respondent nos. 2 to 5 to the writ petitioner, the purchaser, by four conveyance deeds dated 18th September 1992 and 19th September 1992. The appellant lodged right to pre- emption in respect of the land Khata no. 8, Khesra no. 128 of Village Barsanda, District Munger under Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area & Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961. The claim for pre-emption was rejected by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms on 23rd February 1994. The said order was reversed in appeal on 19th November 1996. The appellate order dated 19th November 1996 was set aside in revision application by the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue remitted the matter back to the Collector for fresh consideration and disposal. After the local inspection report was called for and received, the Collector by his order dated 26th March 2002 allowed the claim of pre-emption made by the appellant. The Patna High Court LPA No.1256 of 2011 (2) dt.09-09-2011 3 / 3 3 said order was confirmed by the Board of Revenue. Feeling aggrieved the purchaser filed the above CWJC No. 10152 of 2005. The learned single Judge has by the judgment and order dated 18th April 2011 set aside the order of the Board of Revenue and rejected the claim for pre-emption made by the appellant. Learned single Judge has held that by purchase of parcels of land on 18th September 1992, the purchaser had become the adjoining raiyat, i.e. the purchaser became the owner of the land contiguous to the disputed land. The purchaser of the land can himself become the holder of an adjoining plot in order to defeat the pre-emption application. The decision of the learned single Judge is fortified by the judgments of this Court in the matters of Ram Roop Yadav v. State of Bihar [1987 PLJR 455] and of Nathuni Mahto v. State of Bihar & Ors. [2004(2) PLJR 334 (DB)]. No case for interference is made out. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. Dilip. (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)