IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13039 of 2010 1. PASHUPATI YADAV S/O LATE PRITHIVI YADAV R/O VILL.- NIAJEEPUR,RAGHUBANSH PATHAK KA DERA ,P.S.- SIMARI,DIST.-BUXAR. ---- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER,PATNA DIVISION,PATNA. 3. THE COLLECTOR,BUXAR. 4. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND REFORMS,DUMARAON,DIST.- BUXAR. 5. BRAHMESHWAR YADAV S/O LATE ANDAI RAI AHIR R/O VILL.- NIAJEEPUR,RAGHUBANSH PATHAK KA DERA,P.S.-SIMARI,DIST.- BUXAR. 6. SHREE YADAV S/O LATE ANDAI RAI AHIR R/O VILL.- NIAJEEPUR,RAGHUBANSH PATHAK KA DERA,P.S.-SIMARI,DIST.- BUXAR. 7. BHRIGU YADAV S/O S/O LATE ANDAI RAI AHIR R/O VILL.- NIAJEEPUR,RAGHUBANSH PATHAK KA DERA,P.S.-SIMARI,DIST.- BUXAR. 8. KARJAIYA YADAV S/O S/O LATE ANDAI RAI AHIR R/O VILL.- NIAJEEPUR,RAGHUBANSH PATHAK KA DERA,P.S.-SIMARI,DIST.- BUXAR. 9. RAMASHANKER YADAV S/O S/O LATE ANDAI RAI AHIR R/O VILL.-NIAJEEPUR,RAGHUBANSH PATHAK KA DERA,P.S.- SIMARI,DIST.-BUXAR. 10. CHAMPA KUMAR S/O S/O LATE ANDAI RAI AHIR R/O VILL.- NIAJEEPUR,RAGHUBANSH PATHAK KA DERA,P.S.-SIMARI,DIST.- BUXAR. ----RESPONDENTS. For the petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Jha, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Kumari Amrita, S.C.-I For the respondent Nos. 5 to 10 : Mr. Binod Bihari Sinha,Advocate. ----------- 05 03.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State and respondent nos. 5 to 10. Petitioner is purchaser. He is aggrieved by order dated 12.11.2009, passed by respondent Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Dumaraon in Misc. case no. 6/09-10 ( Bhrigu Nath Yadav vs. Pashupati Yadav), whereby steps have been taken to 2 hand over possession of the lands in question in favour of the pre-emptor, in view of the order(s)/adjudication(s) made by the two Authorities in favour of the respondent nos. 5 to 10. Petitioner claiming himself to be the purchaser objected to the claim of pre-emption raised on behalf of the respondent nos. 5 to 10. By a proceeding dated 06.04.2002 (Annexure-1), the claim of pre-emption was allowed. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order petitioner preferred appeal being appeal case no. 45 of 2002. The said matter was considered and by a well reasoned order dismissed on 12.03.2004 (Annexure-2). Petitioner preferred a revision application against the aforesaid order before the respondent Commissioner vide case no. 17 of 2004. By a proceeding dated 26.07.2005, the said revision application was withdrawn. The order is at Annexure-3. This permission to withdraw the revision application was passed on 26.07.2005, thereafter it appears that possession was not made over to the pre-emptor leading to filing of the present application giving rise to Misc. case no. 6/09-10 for handing over possession of the vended plots in favour of the pre- emptors/respondent nos. 5 to 10, in terms of the provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act,1961 ( herein after referred to as the ‘Act’), which was allowed by the impugned order. Section 16(3)(iii) of the Act reads as under:- (iii) If the application is allowed, the Collector shall by an order direct the transferee to convey the land in favour of the applicant by executing and registering a document of transfer 3 within a period to be specified in the order and, if he neglects or refuses to comply with the direction, the procedure prescribed in order 21, rule 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ( V of 1908), shall be, so far as may be, followed.” It is thus seen that the impugned order dated 12.11.2009 is taken in terms of the provision of the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show that any step was taken to assail the original as well as the appellate order allowing pre-emption in favour of the respondent nos. 5 to 10.On the contrary revision filed against the appellate order was withdrawn by the petitioner. In that view of the matter, this Court finds no merit in this application, which is, accordingly, dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)