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

1990 Supreme(SC) 23

K.JAYACHANDRA REDDY, B.C.RAY
Revenue Officer – Appellant
Versus
Prafullakumarpati – Respondent


Advocates:
A.K.PANDEY, K.K.GUPTA, Kundan Lal Jagga

Judgment

Special leave granted. Arguments heard.

2. These two appeals on special leave arise out of the common judgment of the High Court of Orissa made in O.J.C Nos. 1007 and 1008 of 1983 decided on July 4, 1986 : (reported in (1986) 2 Orissa LR 130) whereby the High Court set aside and quashed the impugned orders made by the Special Officer, Land Reforms, Central Division, Cuttack in O.L.R. Revision No. 131 of 1982 as well as OLR. No. 142 of 1982.

3. The matrix of the case in O.J.C. No. 1007 of 1983 is that on July 30, 1977, the respondent No. 2, Paramanand Sethi filed case No. 85 of 1977 under Section 22 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, against S/Shri B. Mohapatra, Prafulla Kumar Pati and Gadadhar Pati (Respondents nos. 1, 3 and 4) for restoration of lands sold to respondents Nos. 1, 3 and 4, on the ground that respondent No. 2 was a member of the Scheduled Caste (Dhoba Community) and the sales in question were hit by the provisions contained in Section 22 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960. The respondent No. 2 filed a caste certificate of the Additional Tehasildar, Betanoti wherein the respondent No. 2 was shown as belonging to Dhoba by caste which is recognised as a Scheduled 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