Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Babu Lal Gupta S/o Shri Churaman Sao – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
W.P. (C) Nos. 7382, 7384, 7432, 7546, 7709 of 2023
Decided On : 05-08-2024
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. In all these writ petitions, a common question of facts and law are involved and that is why, all these petitions are being heard together with consent of the parties.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondent State.
3. In W.P. (C) No. 7384 of 2023, the prayer has been made for quashing of the order dated 25.08.2023 passed in Revision Case No. 22 of 2022 by the learned Member Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby the learned Member Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, Ranchi has been pleased to dismiss the revision application and affirm the order dated 23.07.2021 passed in Land Ceiling Appeal No. 06/2013-14 passed by respondent no. 2 whereby the land ceiling appeal was rejected and the order of DCLR, Sadar Medninagar dated 12.10.2012 in Land Ceiling Case No. 09/2011-12 was upheld.
In W.P. (C) No. 7382 of 2023, the prayer has been made for quashing of the order dated 25.08.2023 passed in Revision Case No. 21 of 2022 by the learned Member Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby the learned Member Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, Ranchi has been pleased to dismiss the revision application and affirm the order dated 23.07.2021 passed in Land Ceiling Appeal No. 05/2013-14 passed by respondent no. 2 whereby the land ceiling appeal was rejected and the order of DCLR, Sadar Medninagar dated 12.10.2012 in Land Ceiling Case No. 08/2011-12 was upheld.
In W.P. (C) No. 7432 of 2023, the prayer has been made for quashing of the order dated 25.08.2023 passed in Revision Case No. 20 of 2022 by the learned Member Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby the learned Member Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, Ranchi has been pleased to dismiss the revision application and affirm the order dated 23.07.2021 passed in Land Ceiling Appeal No. 04/2013-14 passed by respondent no. 2 whereby the land ceiling appeal was rejected and the order of DCLR, Sadar Medninagar dated 12.10.2012 in Land Ceiling Case No. 07/2011-12 was upheld.
In W.P. (C) No. 7546 of 2023, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that so far as defect no. 4 is concerned, he will remove the said defect in course of the day. Let him do so. The rest of the surviving defects are ignored.
The prayer in this petition has been made for quashing of the order dated 25.08.2023 passed in Revision Case No. 19 of 2022 by the learned Member Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby the learned Member Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, Ranchi has been pleased to dismiss the revision application and affirm the order dated 23.07.2021 passed in Land Ceiling Appeal No. 03/2013-14 passed by respondent no. 2 whereby the land ceiling appeal was rejected and the order of DCLR, Sadar Medninagar dated 12.10.2012 in Land Ceiling Case No. 06/2011-12 was upheld.
In W.P. (C) No. 7709 of 2023, the prayer has been made for quashing of the order dated 25.08.2023 passed in Revision Case No. 18 of 2022 by the learned Member Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby the learned Member Board of Revenue, Jharkhand, Ranchi has been pleased to dismiss the revision application and affirm the order dated 23.07.2021 passed in Land Ceiling Appeal No. 02/2013-14 passed by respondent no. 2 whereby the land ceiling appeal was rejected and the order of DCLR, Sadar Medninagar dated 12.10.2012 in Land Ceiling Case No. 05/2011-12 was upheld.
4. Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners in all these petitions submits that the petitioner is the adjoining raiyat and co-sharer of the land which is the subject matter in all these petitions which has been purchased from respondent no. 5 and pre-emptive petition was filed by respondent no. 4 which was allowed in his favour. He submits that the petitioner has lost up to the revisional court and the learned revisional court has not considered this aspect of the matter that the petitioner is the purchaser of the land in question. He submits in view of that all the orders a
The right of pre-emption under the Bihar Land Reforms Act is only exercisable for the first transaction, and the petitioner failed to establish co-sharer status.
The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 does not extend to correcting factual determinations made by lower tribunals unless there is a clear abuse of discretion.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the law does not recognize the right of pre-emption by a person claiming to be a superior adjoining raiyat to that of the purchaser who is als....
[The right of pre-emption under Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms Act requires the claimant to provide evidence of co-sharer status, and the absence of such evidence renders the application inv....
The court ruled that preemption claims over land classified as residential were not permissible under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, reinforcing that rights of preemption must be based on established co....
The repeal of Section 16(3) of the Ceiling Act does not affect previously executed sale deeds, emphasizing that completed transactions must be upheld despite procedural amendments.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
