Patna High CourtL.P.A/2013/2015dismissed

Jai Shankar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-11-28Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad,Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.2013 of 2015 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5887 of 2009 =========================================================== Jai Shankar Prasad S/o Sitaram Prasad Resident of Village - Lami Chaur, P.S. - Bhore, District - Gopalganj.

.... .... Appellant/Respondent

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Gopalganj.

2. Chiraya Devi Daughter of Sheonath Bhagat

3. Lilawati Devi Daughter of Sheonath Bhagat

4. Smt. Lalmati Devi W/o Sheonath Bhagat All above three are residents of village - Bairuna, P.O. - Lamichaour, P.S. - Bhore, District - Gopalganj. .... .....Respondents/Respondents

5. Sudarshan Bhagat S/o Rajmangal Bhagat Resident of Village - Bairawana, P.O. Lami Chaur, P.S. - Bhore, District - Gopalganj. .... .... Respondent/Writ Petitioner.

=========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Pratik Kr. Sinha, AC to G.A.-V For the Respondents :

Mr. Anil Kr. Jha, Sr. Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD) Date: 28-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

We are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge for the obvious reasons that the learned Single Judge having appreciated the submissions made at the bar left it open for the purchasers as well as the pre-emptors to take their pleas before the D.C.L.R., the authority, who will consider all such pleas which will be raised before him and shall record a conclusive

Patna High Court LPA No.2013 of 2015 dt.28-11-2017 finding of fact.

Learned counsel for the appellant has once again contended before us that the land in question is not an agricultural land, and, therefore, this fact not having been mentioned in the application for pre-emption, the pre-emption is liable to fail. We do not see any reason to pre-empt that this point shall not be considered by the D.C.L.R. The appeal has no merit. It is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) Rajeev/- (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 29.11.2017 Transmission Date NA