SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 1006

S.B.MAJMUDAR, KULDIP SINGH, B.L.HANSARIA
State Of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Dy. Director Of Consolidation – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Kuldip Singh, J.-The land in dispute measuring 22.11 acres was notified as reserved forest under Section 20 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (the act) by the notification dated August 19,1963. Respondents, in the appeals herein, claimed before the authorities under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act 1953 (the Consolidation Act) that they were in possession of the land and had acquired Sirdari rights. They further claimed that the land was illegally subjected to the proceedings under the Act because they had become owners of the land. Since the land was not the property of the Government-according to them-the notification declaring the land as reserved forest was illegal. The Consolidation Authorities accepted the objections of the respondents. The writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the State of U.P.- challenging the orders of the Consolidation Authorities -were dismissed by the High Court. These appeals are against the judgment of the High Court upholding the orders of the Consolidation Authorities.

2. We may briefly notice the facts of the case. The State Government issued a notification dated March 29, 1954 declaring its intention to c














Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top