APARESH KUMAR SINGH,KAILASH PRASAD DEO,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant, State and the writ petitioner/ respondent no.1.
(2.) Writ petitioner preferred Pre-emption application under section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 against the purchase of land by the respondent No.5/appellant herein before the Court of Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Koderma being Pre-emption Case No.03 of 2005/2006. His claim was allowed. The vendee/appellant herein unsuccessfully pursued an appeal before the Collector, Koderma being Land Ceiling Appeal No.01 of 2007/08. The original Revenue Court and the appellate authority as such decided in favour of the pre- empetor/writ petitioner. In revision the Board of Revenue vide impugned order dated 19.12.2009/29.03.2010 in Land Ceiling Revision No.08 of 2008 however, set aside the order of the inferior authority on the ground that the three brothers of writ petitioners had not made a joint application for pre-emption.
(3.) Learned writ Court, however, found the reasoning of the Board of Revenue to be erroneous and held as under : "7. After hearing counsel for the parties and after considering the materials available on record, this court finds that the application for pre-emption which was originally filed by the petitioner was allowed not only on the ground that the petitioner was the cosharer of the vended property but also on the ground that the petitioner was adjoining raiyat. The petitioner's application for preemption was allowed against which appeal was dismissed. So far as revisional order is concerned, the revisional order is totally silent on the status of the petitioner being the adjoining raiyat and the revisional authority held that all the three brothers ought to have joined for the purpose of filing application for pre-emption. This court finds that as per the provisions of Section 16(3) of the aforesaid Act, any co-sharer of the property is entitled to file application for pre-emption and accordingly the finding of the revisional authority that all the three brothers ought to have joined for the purpose of filing the application for pre-emption, is perverse and reflects complete non application of judicial mind in the matter by the revisional authority. This court also finds that the revisional authority has not discussed the finding which has been recorded by the original court and affirmed by the appellate court. Further the revisional court has not disturbed the finding that the petitioner is adjoining raiyat which by itself is a valid cause of action for filing an application for pre-emption. Under the said circumstance, this court finds that the impugned order dated 19.12.2009/29.03.2010 passed by Member, Board of Revenue, Jharkhand in Land Ceiling Revision Case no. 08 of 2008 is hereby set aside. 8. The Collector of the District is directed to take appropriate steps as per the provisions of Section 16 (3) (iii) of the aforesaid Act for the purpose of execution and registration of the sale deed in connection with the property in favour of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." ;