IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.203 of 2007 KRISHNA KUMAR SINGH . Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 4 4.8.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State. This application has been filed for reviewing the order dated 17.12.2004 passed in CWJC No.11649 of 2000. By order dated 4.9.2000, the Additional Member Board of Revenue had directed the D.C.L.R. for conducting spot inquiry of the land appertaining to revisional Khata no. 253 of revisional plot No. 1465 situated in the village Chhap, P.S.- Paru, in the district of Muzaffarpur in order to ascertain the nature of the land. The land in question was transferred in favour of the review petitioner through registered sale deed dated 11.8.1995. The respondent no.5 of the review petition filed an application for pre- 2 emption under section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Are and Acquisition of surplus land) Act, 1961 claiming himself to be the adjacent raiyat of the land. The DCLR, Muzaffarpur allowed pre- emption application filed by the pre-emptor and that was also affirmed by the Appellate authority, the Additional Collector. The purchaser/review petitioner filed Ceiling Revision application no. 103 of 1999 before the Member Board of Revenue on the ground that pre-emption application is not maintainable considering the nature of the land which is residential. It was also submitted by the purchaser/review petitioner that in the sale deed itself the purpose of purchase has been mentioned for construction of residential house. Both the courts below, without properly conducting spot inquiry for finding out the nature of the 3 land have allowed the pre-emption application. The Additional Member Board of Revenue by order dated 4.9.2000 remanded the case to the DCLR, Muzaffarpur to ascertain the nature of the land, since it had been done by the Appellate Court as well as the first court. Against the order passed by Additional Member Board of Revenue CWJC No. 11649 of 2000 was filed by the pre- emptor. The review petitioner, who was respondent could not appear and in his absence the writ application was allowed, considering the submissions of the petitioner's counsel that the nature of the land as mentioned in the records of right being cultivable, there is no reason to hold that it is residential in nature. Counsel for the review petitioner submits that the records of right had been prepared much earlier, subsequent to that 4 with the passage of the time,the nature of the land has considerably changed. The land which has been purchased by the petitioner, as well as on adjacent plots, several residential houses of the people are standing. In support of this fact, he has annexed the photographs to show that at present the nature of the land is not agricultural but the residential; as such pre-emption should not have been allowed. In the review application notices were issued to respondent no.5. He appeared through his counsel but on different date matter was adjourned for appearance of the counsel of respondent no.5, but he knowingly chose not to appear. Considering the submissions of the review petitioner and perusing the photographs, annexed with the review application, I am of the view that order dated 5 17.12.2004 passed in CWJC No. 11649 of 2000 is liable to be reviewed. The order passed by the Additional Member Board of Revenue dated 4.9.2000 which was earlier quashed is restored and the matter is remanded to the DCLR, Muzaffarpur for conducting the spot verification of the land in question. The DCLR, Muzaffarpur will issue notice to the pre-emptor as well as the purchaser and in presence of both the parties. The verification of the land will be made to ascertain the present status and nature of the land. The Report will be submitted, preferably within three months of the production/communication of the order and considering the report submitted in this regard, final order will be passed by the DCLR, Muzaffarpur in original Ceiling case No. 2 of 1997-1998. The ceiling proceeding either be dropped or proceeding, subject to order 6 passed regarding nature of the land in question. Review application stands allowed. (Mridula Mishra,J.) A.Kumar