Back
KALYAN RAI SURANA
Bengia Talo, S/o Lt. Bengia Talum – Appellant
Versus
State of AP To be represented through the Chief Secretary – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Kalyan Rai Surana, J.
Heard Mr. M. Nibo, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. P. Sangeeta, learned State counsel for respondent Nos. 1 & 2; Mr. D. Kamduk, learned Standing counsel for the Land Management respondent No. 3; Ms. N. Danggen, learned counsel for respondent No. 5 and Mr. G. Riba, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 6 & 7.
2. It is noted that the respondent No. 4, though impleaded by name is the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Capital Complex, Itanagar. As we do not find anything in this writ petition alleging malice against the respondent No. 4, the respondent No. 4 has acted in his official capacity to pass order and to implement the directions by the Deputy Commissioner. Accordingly, we request the learned State counsel to appear for respondent No. 4.
3. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has made three fold prayers; (1) for quashing the order dated 16.06.2022 passed in the proceeding of the Art of Living Society-vs-Shri Bengia Talo and 2 others and eviction order dated 09.08.2022; (2) cancellation of LPC dated 21.09.2011 and LPC dated 22.09.2011 issued in favor of the Art of Living Society, Jullang, Itan
The Deputy Commissioner cannot issue eviction orders without specific legal authority under the Arunachal Pradesh (Land Settlement and Records) Act, 2000.
Traditional land ownership rights in Arunachal Pradesh must be acknowledged, and mere possession is insufficient to establish ownership without considering customary practices.
Occupying government land without permission is not permissible, but individuals may apply for land allotment for consideration by the authorities.
The appellate authority exceeded its jurisdiction by invalidating a Land Possession Certificate based on a trial court's protective order, which cannot be adjudicated outside of the original judicial....
The Court ruled that public authorities must provide reasons for their decisions, and failure to do so violates Article 14 of the Constitution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that when an order for ejectment and damages has attained finality, and the party against whom the order was passed has not taken any steps to chal....
Revenue Authorities cannot adjudicate land title disputes; such matters must be resolved by Civil Courts under the Assam Land Revenue Regulation, 1886.
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
