IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13448 of 2006 =========================================================== 1(a) Jagmati Devi, W/o Late Ramdeo Tiwary, R/o- Village- Tiwary Khareya, P.S.- Kuchaikote, District- Gopalganj. 1(b). Bijay Tiwary 1(c). Binod Tiwary 1(d). Vikas Tiwary All sons of late Ramdeo Tiwary 1(e). Fulmanti Devi, W/o- Ramakant Tiwary, daughter of Late Ramdeo Tiwary, resident of Village- Naya Gaoun, Tulasia, P.S. Mathua, District- Gopalganj 1(f). Sangita Devi, W/o- Sri Ramayan Mishra, Daughter of Late Ramdeo Tiwary, Resident of Village- Basdila Khurd, P.S.- Patherawa, District- Kushinagar (U.P.) .... .... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Addl. Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Addl. Collector, Gopalganj 4. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Gopalganj ………..Respondent 1set set. 5. Buchan Devi, W/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6. (a).Chanda Devi, W/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6.(b). Navin Chandra Pathak, s/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6 (c). Praveen Chandra Pathak, s/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6(d). Smt. Manjulata, W/o- Sushil Kumar Ojha, R/o- Village- Amwa, P.S.+Dist. Gopalganj. 6 (e). Pushpalata, D/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6 (f). Priyalata, D/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak All resident of Sareya Ward No. 5, P.S. +Dist. Gopalganj. ………..Respondent 2nd Set. 7. Maithilisaran Pandey, S/o- Late Gayadatta Pandey, R/o- Mohalla- Sareya, P.O.+P.S.+Dist.- Gopalganj. .... .... Respondent 3rd Set with =========================================================== Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 714 of 2008 =========================================================== Bhabhikhan Prasad, S/o- Sohan Sah, R/o- Village- Karwatahi Bazar, P.S.- Kuchaikote, Dist.- Gopalganj. .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Addl. Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Addl. Collector, Gopalganj 4. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Gopalganj ………..Respondent 1set set. 5. Buchan Devi, W/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6. (a).Chanda Devi, W/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak Patna High Court CWJC No.13448 of 2006 dt.15-04-2015 2 6.(b). Navin Chandra Pathak, s/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6 (c). Praveen Chandra Pathak, s/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6(d). Smt. Manjulata, W/o- Sushil Kumar Ojha, R/o- Village- Amwa, P.S.+Dist. Gopalganj. 6 (e). Pushpalata, D/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6 (f). Priyalata, D/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak All resident of Sareya Ward No. 5, P.S. +Dist. Gopalganj. ………..Respondent 2nd Set. 7. Maithilisaran Pandey, S/o- Late Gayadatta Pandey, R/o- Mohalla- Sareya, P.O.+P.S.+Dist.- Gopalganj. .... .... Respondent 3rd Set with =========================================================== Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1238 of 2008 =========================================================== Brajbhusan Pandey, S/o- Jagdish Pandey, R/o- Mohalla- Sareya, P.O.+P.S.+Dist. Gopalganj. .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Addl. Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Addl. Collector, Gopalganj 4. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Gopalganj ………..Respondent 1set set. 5. Buchan Devi, W/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6. (a).Chanda Devi, W/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6.(b). Navin Chandra Pathak, s/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6 (c). Praveen Chandra Pathak, s/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6(d). Smt. Manjulata, W/o- Sushil Kumar Ojha, R/o- Village- Amwa, P.S.+Dist. Gopalganj. 6 (e). Pushpalata, D/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak 6 (f). Priyalata, D/o- Late Sivkumar Pathak All resident of Sareya Ward No. 5, P.S. +Dist. Gopalganj. ………..Respondent 2nd Set. 7. Maithilisaran Pandey, S/o- Late Gayadatta Pandey, R/o- Mohalla- Sareya, P.O.+P.S.+Dist.- Gopalganj. .... .... Respondent 3rd Set =========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : Mr. A.K.SHARMA, Advocate. For Private Respondent No. 5 : Mr. Pandit Jee Pandey, Advocate. Mr. Nawnit Kumar Tiwary, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Pratik Kumar Gupta, A.C. to G.A. XII. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 15-04-2015 Patna High Court CWJC No.13448 of 2006 dt.15-04-2015 3 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners purchaser and the counsel for the preemptor Respondent No. 5 who prays for time to verify the contents of the report dated 25.09.2008 of Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Gopalganj submitted in the light of the order of this Court dated 28.08.2008 passed in this batch of writ petitions. Aforesaid report was received in this Court on 30.09.2008, as would appear from the office notes dated 30.09.2008. The writ petitions were placed for admission on 15.10.2008 when the matter was adjourned with direction to put up the case under the same heading in due course with direction to the parties to utilize the time in the meanwhile for completion of pleadings. Before the matter could be listed again writ petitioner left for his heavenly abode, Interlocutory Application No. 6039 of 2010 was filed for substitution which was placed before the Bench on 02.02.2015 and as prayed for on behalf of the parties the Interlocutory Application was directed to be put up for orders on 09.02.2015. On 09.02.2015 writ petitioner Ramdeo Tiwary was substituted after expunging his name. The matter was again considered for admission on 02.03.2015 when the petitions were Patna High Court CWJC No.13448 of 2006 dt.15-04-2015 4 adjourned for four weeks, placed for consideration before this Court on 31.03.2015 when the learned Single Judge giving reference to the order dated 28.08.2008 directed that the petitions be listed before this Court. Accordingly, the matter was placed before this Court on 08.04.2015 when the parties prayed for time and the matter was passed over for that day so as to enable them to verify the circumstances in which Buchan Devi, Brajbhushan Pandey did not put their signature on the report as was directed by this Court under order dated 28.08.2008. In the circumstances, prayer made by Sri Pandit Jee Pandey to adjourn the case by another week is wholly unjustified, I proceed not only to hear the parties but also dispose of the case. 2. Petitioners are the purchaser. One Shyam Sundar Kuer filed application for preemption on the ground that she is the boundary raiyat of the vended property. During the pendency of the preemption case Shyam Sundar Kuer died while the matter remained pending in the original court of D.C.L.R., Gopalganj itself. After death of Shyam Sundar Kuer Respondent Nos. 5, 6 were substituted on the ground that they are Patna High Court CWJC No.13448 of 2006 dt.15-04-2015 5 the daughter, son-in-law i.e. the legal heir, representative of Shyam Sundar Kue and stepped into her shoes. The D.C.L.R. and the Additional Collector found the claim of Shyam Sundar Kuer that she is the boundary raiyat of the vended plot incorrect as according to both the Revenue Authorities one Mahatam Pandey intervened as he also had one Katha 10 dhurs land in between the vended plot of Jagdish Pandey and the plot of Shyam Sundara Kunwar. The Board of Revenue under the impugned order reversed the order passed by the D.C.L.R., Additional Collector holding that Mahatam Pandey had no intervening plot in between the lands of Shyam Sundar Kuer, Jagdish Pandey. This Court having considered the sketch map of the vended plot as also the land of Shyam Sundar Kuer, Jagdish Pandey at page 18 of the brief directed D.C.L.R., Gopalganj to make inquiry, submit report. D.C.L.R. has submitted report dated 25.09.2008 along with the sketch map, from the report as also the sketch map it is quite evident that Mahatam Pandey has an intervening plot of land of 1 Katha 10 dhurs in between the plot of Jagdish Pandey, Shyam Sundar Kuer. 3. In the light of the finding recorded by the Patna High Court CWJC No.13448 of 2006 dt.15-04-2015 6 D.C.L.R. to which none of the parties has filed any objection, I am to hold that Shyam Sundar Kuer never had any adjoining land by the side of plot of Jagdish Pandey, the impugned order dated 23.03.2006 passed by Additional Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Annexure-4 proceeds on an erroneous assumption that Shyam Sundar Kuer is the boundary raiyat of Jagdish Pandey, which is, accordingly, set aside. The original sale-deed executed in favour of Bhabhikhan Prasad, Ramdeo Tiwary by Maithilisaran Pandey shall continue to hold the field. Notwithstanding the present order, re- conveyance made vide sale-seed dated 18.11.2009 executed by Brajbhushan Pandey in favour of Buchan Devi shall also continue to hold the field. 4. The writ petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N. Sinha, J) U T