Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Balwan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Divisional Commissioner, Kangra Division at Dharamshala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revision petition challenges partition order dismissal. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. impugned order ignores revision grounds lacking reasoning. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. upholding lower orders needs no independent reasons. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. impugned order quotes lower authority without analysis. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. revision demands independent mind application and reasons. (Para 9) |
| 6. remanded for reasoned order with expeditious directions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
JUDGMENT :
Ajay Mohan Goel, J.
Learned Court Guardian informs the Court that her fee stands paid to her.
2. By way of this petition, the petitioners have assailed order dated 19.12.2022 (Annexture P-5), passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Kangra Division at Dharamshala, H.P., in terms whereof, the revision filed by them against the order dated 06.02.2017, passed by the Collector, Kangra Sub-Division, District Kangra, H.P. has been dismissed by upholding the said order as well as the order passed by the earlier Authority.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of the Court to the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Kangra and submitted that the impugned order is no order in the eyes of law, as there is no refer
Quasi-judicial authority dismissing revision must pass reasoned order addressing grounds raised and independently apply mind to lower orders; mere upholding without reasoning renders it invalid.
Higher appellate authorities cannot consider new facts/pleas not raised before first appellate authority; no interference with lower order absent proven perversity.
Partition of land - Power to call for, examine and revise proceedings of Revenue Officers - In exercise of revisional jurisdiction by the Commissioner, he cannot modify or reverse orders of his subor....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the jurisdiction of the Financial Commissioner and the Commissioner in revising partition orders under the un-amended and ame....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the provisions of Section 16 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 and the Haryana Land Revenue Act, 1887, regarding the autho....
Consent orders binding parties must be honored unless evidence of fraud or misrepresentation is provided.
Order condoning delay under Limitation Act Section 5 by Collector in revenue appeal is appealable to Commissioner under Land Revenue Act Section 14 as it conclusively decides limitation, not interloc....
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
