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

2002 Supreme(Raj) 664

BHAGABATI PRASAD BANERJEE
Sampat Lal Sethia – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.S. Saluja, for Petitioner L.R. Choudhary, for Respondents

Honble PRASAD, J.–The petitioner in the present writ petition has impugned the order of Revisional Authority. In revision, the Revisional Authority has quashed a grant made in favour of the petitioner had his near relatives. The petitioner was at the relevant time, Up-Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, Udasar. Even, recently he continues to be Up-Sarpanch.

(2). An application was field by the petitioner for the purchase of land in view of Rule 256 and 266 of the Rajasthan Panchayat (General) Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1961). While the application was processed, site was inspected as required by Rule 258 of the Rules of 1961. A Committee of three members for inspection of site was constituted by Panchayat including the petitioner. Since, the Committee of Members for inspection of site included the petitioner, he did not participate in the inspection. The inspection was carried out only by two members namely Shri Sukh Singh and Shri Mohbtaram. After inspection, a notice under Rule 260 of the Rules of 1961 was published. The petitioner has submitted that even if it is assumed that notice did not fulfill the requirement of Rule 260, yet till date no objection was






















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