Back
SURESHWAR THAKUR, KULDEEP TIWARI
Dinesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. meeting minutes document decisions on boundary pillars. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. costs for boundary pillars to be shared equally. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court directs prompt action for boundary disputes. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. appreciation for assistance; next hearing scheduled. (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
In pursuance to the directions previously made by this Court, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India has placed on record the minutes of the meeting, which occurred at Chandigarh, on 10.04.2024, at 03:00 P.M. In the said meeting, the attendees were the officials of PHCGDC, Survey of India, Chandigarh, and, officials of O/o Director, Land Records Haryana, Panchkula. However, no official from the State of U.P. recorded his presence, in the said meeting.
2. A perusal of the minutes of the meeting (supra), and, which are taken on record, discloses, that decisions were taken with respect to the participants preparing the list of pillars of all disputed areas, which are required to be demarcated on the ground, by the Survey of India, Chandigarh. The said list of pillars is detailed therein, to be submitted by the concerned, in the office of the PHCGDC, Survey of Ind
Royalty – Bidder is advised to inspect and satisfy itself regarding mining area before participating in bidding process.
The court has the authority to direct demarcation of land and determine the method and costs of demarcation.
State authorities must adhere to statutory timelines for adjudication to prevent denial of justice and ensure prompt legal redress.
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
