IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No. 919 of 2010 (Arising out of CWJC No. 1195 of 2008) 1. Rambha Sharma, W/O Shri Arjun Prasad Sharma, R/O Village Kaituka Nandan, P.S. -Parasa, District Saran, Presently residing at New Colony Chainpur, @ Sir Ganesh Datt Nager, P.O. Damodarpur, P.S. -Kanti, District Muzaffarpur………Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Secretary Land Reforms and Revenue, Old Secretariat Building, Harding Road,Patna-1. 2. The Additional Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar Old Secretariat Building Harding Road, Patna-1. 3. The Collector, Muzaffarpur. 4. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Muzaffarpur (West). Respondents No. 1 to 4/Respondents 5. Ghan Shyam Chaudhary, S/O Late Chandrika Chaudhary, R/O Village -Gijas , P.S. -Saraiya, District -Muzaffarpur, Presently residing at New Colony Chainpur @ Sir Ganesh Dutt Nagar, P.S. Kanti, P.O. Damodarpur, District Muzaffarpur. …Petitioner/Respondent. 6. Mahendra Kumar, S/O Late Gauri Shankar Kumar, R/O Village Jagdishpur, P.S.- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur. 7. Ram Naresh Kumar, S/O Late Gauri Shankar Kumar, R/O Village Jagdishpur, P.S.- Sahebganj,District- Muzaffarpur. ….Respondents ---------------------------------- 3. 30.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 and perused the order of the Writ Court. The Writ Court has allowed the writ petition preferred by respondent, Ghan Shyam Choudhary and has set aside the order allowing pre-emption by the Board of Revenue, Bihar. It may be noted that the Original Court as well as Appellate Authority had also disallowed the prayer of pre-emption made by the appellant on a finding that no doubt originally the land in question was a big plot of land 2 over one and half acres capable of agricultural use but subsequently the land owner plotted the land in to smaller areas of about 100 square yards and sold the same to persons who want to construct residential houses on their plots. The land is situated close to Muzaffarpur Town and is known as New Colony, Chainpur. In our considered view, the Writ Court has adopted a correct approach after noticing that the appellant had also purchased similar plot and has built a pucca house on substantial portion thereof. The urbanization of the area is writ large on the face of the record and in case pre-emption is allowed, the vended land measuring about 10 dhurs which is equivalent to 100 squares approximately will not become part of any agricultural holding but only add to area of residential house of the appellant. While agreeing with the views of the Writ Court we would like to add that in the changed social scenario people are compelled to urbanise agricultural areas situated close to towns with a view to exercise their fundamental right of residence at place of their choice. If such a claim of right of residence is found to be genuine and not a sham raised only to defend pre-emption claim over an agricultural 3 land, due weightage must be given to fundamental right which guarantees that a citizen may reside any where at the place of his/her choice. In the facts and circumstances, we find no good reason to interfere with the views of the Writ Court. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. Mkc/ (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Shivaji Pandey, J.)