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

2008 Supreme(Chh) 263

SATISH K.AGNIHOTRI
BALIRAM – Appellant
Versus
BOARD OF REVENUE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Shri Ram Kumar Tiwari, Advocate, for the Petitioner. .
Shri Alok Bakshi, Govt. Advocate, for the Respondents.

ORDER

1. The petitioner, by this petition seeks a writ of mandamus, commanding the respondents to take appropriate decision on the application for allotting the land to the petitioner for agriculture use.

2. Initially, an application was made by the petitioner before the Collector on 10.4.2003 for allotment of the disputed land. A report dated 6.5.2003 (Annexure P 13) was submitted by Tahsildar, Takhatpur, holding that the land in dispute is recorded as 'Bade Jhad Ka Jangal' though at present there is no forest on the land in dispute. The Additional Collector after having considered the report declined to allot the land on 21.1.2004 (Annexure P/2) on the ground that since the land is recorded as 'Bade Jhad Ka Jangal' the allotment cannot be granted without permission of the Central Government.

3. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue after having considered all the facts of the matter, vide order dated 11.8.2004 (Annexure PI}) affirmed the order dated 21.1.2004, passed by the Additional Collector, holding that since the land is recorded as 'Bade Jhad Ka Jangal' in revenue records, no allotment can be made without the per







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