JUDGMENT :

The present writ petition is taken up today through Video conferencing.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 27th November, 2018 passed by the Court of Member, Board of Revenue, Jharkhand in Case No. 13 of 2013 whereby the revision application of the petitioner has been dismissed. Further prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 27th April, 2013 passed by the Additional Collector, Pakur in Pre-emption Case No.02 of 2012 as well as the order dated 27th April, 2012 passed by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Pakur (respondent no.3) in Pre-emption case No.01 of 2011-12, whereby the said courts below have rejected the right of pre-emption of the petitioner by holding that the petitioner is not the adjacent raiyat in respect of the transferred land measuring 08 kathas pertaining to Plot No. 2822, Khewat No.01, Mouza Prithvinagar, Village Siteshnagar, Police Station Pakur, District – Pakur (hereinafter referred to as “said land”).

3. The factual background of the case, as stated in the present writ petition, is that the petitioner had purchased the part of Plot No.2822 by virtue of registered sale deed no.1642 of 2006 and, thus, he claimed to have become the adjoining raiyat of the said land. The said land was transferred by a registered sale deed no.1338 dated 10th March, 2011 by the owner-Abdul Basir to his wife Nur Nehar Khatoon on consideration amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an application under section 16(3)(i) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 well within three months from the date of such transfer, which was numbered as Preemption Case no.01 of 2011-12. In the said case, the respondents appeared and denied that the petitioner is the adjacent raiyat. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Pakur (respondent no.3) vide order dated 27th April, 2012 rejected the claim of the petitioner by holding that the petitioner failed to produce any sound evidence showing that he was the adjoining raiyat of the said land. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the respondent no.2 being Pre-emption Case No.02 of 2012, however, the said appeal was also dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred a revision petition being Revision Case No.13 of 2013 in the court of Member, Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, which was dismissed vide order dated 27th November, 2018, affirming the orders passed by the respondent no.2 and the respondent no.3. Hence, the present writ petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by the respondent revenue authorities are illegal and unsustainable in the eye of law, as they failed to consider the evidence on record that the petitioner was the adjoining raiyat of the said land. The courts below failed to take into consideration that the petitioner was the only adjoining raiyat of the said land. It is further submitted that the order of the courts below are the result of non-consideration of facts and documents as well as the grounds taken by the petitioner. The findings of the courts below are factually incorrect and as such the same are liable to be set aside. It is also submitted that the sale deed of the petitioner conclusively proves that the petitioner is the adjoining raiyat.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record. To appreciate the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I have gone through the orders passed by the courts below. The respondent no.3, while passing the order dated 27th April, 2012, has observed that the petitioner is not the adjacent raiyat of the said land, as would be evident from the sale deed no.803 of 2011 by which the respondent no.4 had purchased the land appertaining to plot no.2822 and 2882 measuring a total area of 18 kathas and 18 Dhur from respondent nos.6 to 9. It was further observed that the petitioner did not produce his sale deed, wh