Back
JUDGMENT :
ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.
1. Heard. Rule. Heard finally at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. The petitioner, son of the original owner of the land, Gut No. 1206, assails the order dated 09th July, 2015 passed by the Respondent No.1 - the State Minister (revenue), Government of Maharashtra in Appeal No. 3315/899/PK-197/J-6 whereby dismissed the Appeal, to correct the consolidation scheme of land Gut No.1206 at village Kashti, Tq. Shrigonda and the order/communication dated 15th July, 2014 of Respondent No.3 informing the Petitioner that his application was disposed of without any action. Also, the order/communication dated 3rd July, 2014 of Respondent No.2, thereby directed Respondent No.3 to scrutinise the scheme and inform the Petitioner accordingly, has preferred this petition.
3. Shorn of superfluities, the background facts of the case can be stated in brief, as follows:-
On 20th March, 1974, a consolidation scheme was implemented, whereby the land survey Nos. 6/3, 6/6 and 6/7 of village Kashti, Tq. Shrigonda were converted into Gut Nos. 1212, 1206 and 1208, respectively, by following the due procedure of law. However, the Pet
The court clarified that applications for correction of consolidation schemes must be filed within a reasonable time, typically three years, and that significant delays render such applications inval....
The implementation of land consolidation schemes must strictly adhere to statutory provisions; failure renders any resultant claims invalid.
Point of Law : If there was any technical violation of the rules of natural justice, that was not a ground for interference, as such interference would result in resurrection of an illegal, nay, void....
Delay in filing an appeal against consolidation orders must be satisfactorily explained; otherwise, the order is invalid due to lack of jurisdiction.
The court affirmed that disputes regarding consolidation schemes must be resolved through appellate remedies, and title disputes among estate holders are to be adjudicated by civil courts, not under ....
Jurisdiction under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings Act is limited to clerical corrections and cannot adjudicate title disputes, which are reserved for Civil Courts.
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
