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

2001 Supreme(All) 702

R.H.ZAIDI
MOHAMMAD MIYAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.I.Naqvi, VINAI SINGH

R. H. ZAIDI, J.

( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel and Mr. A. I. Naqvi, who appeared for respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and also perused the record.

( 2 ) BY means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 20. 11. 1974 passed by the prescribed authority and order dated 30. 7. 1980 passed by the additional District and Sessions Judge, acting as appellate authority under the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, for short the Act and for an order in the nature of mandamus declaring the whole proceedings against the petitioner from the stage of prescribed authority as illegal.

( 3 ) THE relevant facts of the case giving rise to the present petition, in brief, are that a notice under Section 10 (2) of the Act was served upon the petitioner on 14. 3. 1974. On receipt of the notice, petitioner filed an objection claiming that no land out of the holding of the petitioner was liable to be declared as surplus. The parties filed evidence in support of their cases. The prescribed authority after going through th














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