Back
ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH, NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Rajgiri Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.—Heard Mr. Anand Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Naresh Chandra Verma, learned counsel for the respondent no.3. Mr. Harun Kuraishi, learned AC to SC- 1 submitted that the State is a formal party in the present case.
2. The instant intra-court appeal has been filed by the petitioners/appellants challenging the order dated 15.09.2014 passed by the learned single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 14475 of 2007 whereby he has dismissed the writ application. The operative part of the aforestated order dated 15.09.2014 reads as under:—
“9. Having considered the rival contentions of the parties let us examine the first objection raised by the petitioners that it suffers from principle of res-judicata/construction res-judicata. From the submission and record of the case it appears that objection filed by the petitioners under Section10(2) and 10(4) of the Act was rejected on the ground of limitation which was affirmed by the appellate stage but the revisional court remanded back the matter. When the revisional court has remanded back the matter then in that circumstance it cannot be said that the order passed by the Consolidation Officer rejecting the object
The court ruled that title objections under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act must be decided on merit, emphasizing the need for proper jurisdiction and evidence rather than relying on alleged c....
The Deputy Director of Consolidation's remand for a fresh hearing was justified to ensure fairness, given the significant delay and procedural irregularities in prior decisions.
Restoration applications under CPC do not abate under Section 5(2) of the Consolidation Act, allowing for adjudication on merits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a Revision under Section 37(1) cannot be entertained after at least 15 years and in the availability of a Revision under Section 36, thereby d....
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....
Parties must show vested interest to contest consolidation proceedings; the Revisional Authority has the power to rectify procedural lapses under Section 48 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act,....
Quasi-judicial authorities cannot exercise review powers without explicit statutory authorization, and such actions taken after substantial delays are deemed illegal.
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
