IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1754 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13039 of 2010 With Interlocutory Application No. 7990 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No.1754 of 2011. ====================================================== Pashupati Yadav, S/o Late Prithvi Yadav, R/o Village- Niajeepur, Raghubansh Pathak Ka Dera, P.S. - Simari, District - Buxar .... .... Petitioner / Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna 3. The Collector, Buxar 4. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Dumraon, District - Buxar 5. Brahmeshwar Yadav, S/o Andai Ram Ahir @ Andai Rai Ahir, R/o Village- Niajeepur, Raghubansh Pathak Ka Dera, P.S.-Simari, District- Buxar 6. Shree Yadav, S/o Andai Ram Ahir @ Andai Rai Ahir, R/o Village- Niajeepur, Raghubansh Pathak Ka Dera, P.S.-Simari, District- Buxar 7. Bhrigu Yadav, S/o Andai Ram Ahir @ Andai Rai Ahir, R/o Village- Niajeepur, Raghubansh Pathak Ka Dera, P.S.-Simari, District- Buxar 8. Kanhaiya Yadav @ Karjaiya Yadav, S/o Andai Ram Ahir @ Andai Rai Ahir, R/o Village - Niajeepur, Raghubansh Pathak Ka Dera, P.S.-Simari, District- Buxar 9. Ramashanker Yadav, S/o Andai Ram Ahir @ Andai Rai Ahir, R/o Village - Niajeepur, Raghubansh Pathak Ka Dera, P.S.-Simari, District- Buxar 10. Champa Kumar, S/o Andai Ram Ahir @ Andai Rai Ahir, R/o Village- Niajeepur, Raghubansh Pathak Ka Dera, P.S.-Simari, District- Buxar .... .... Respondents / Respondents. ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajib Ranjan Jha, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Ms. Kumari Amrita, GP 10. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Patna High Court LPA No.1754 of 2011 (3) dt.24-11-2011 2 / 3 2 and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 3 24-11-2011 Re. I.A. No. 7990 of 2011. The delay of 16 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Re. LPA No. 1754 of 2011. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 3rd December 2010 made by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No. 13039 of 2010, the writ petitioner has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. The subject matter of dispute is a piece of land of R.S. Khata No. 215, Plot No. 55 admeasuring 18 decimals situated at Village – Niajeepur, Raghubansh Pathak Ka Dera, P.S. – Simari, District – Buxar. The appellant purchased the said piece of land from its owners Raj Narayan Pathak and Harendra Pathak under the registered sale deed dated 3rd August 2007. Feeling agitated one Andai Ram Ahir, the predecessor of the respondent nos. 5 to 10, claimed a right to pre-emption under Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area & Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961. The said claim for pre-emption was upheld by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Dumraon under his order dated 6th April 2002 passed in Ceiling Case No. 12/2001-2002. The said order was confirmed by the District Collector under order dated 12th March 2004 in Appeal Case No. 45 of 2002. The said order was challenged by the appellant - purchaser, before the Board of Revenue in Case No. 17 of 2004. Patna High Court LPA No.1754 of 2011 (3) dt.24-11-2011 3 / 3 3 The appellant, however, did not pursue the matter further and withdrew the said proceeding on 26th July 2005. The pre-emptor thereafter filed Misc. Case No. 6/09-10 before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms for recovery of possession of the land in question. The said application was allowed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms on 12th November 2009. The concerned Circle Officer was directed to recover possession of the said piece of land and hand it over to the pre-emptor. Feeling aggrieved the appellant-purchaser filed the above CWJC No. 13039 of 2010 under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition has been rejected by the learned single Judge. Therefore, the present Appeal. We have heard the learned counsels extensively. We are of the opinion that the order of pre-emption made by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms and confirmed by the District Collector has become final as the appellant chose not to pursue the matter further. As the order of pre-emption has become final, the recovery of possession is consequential and imperative. The appellant has no right to object to recovery of possession. Learned single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition. No case for interference is made out. Appeal is dismissed in limine. Dilip. (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)