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

2001 Supreme(All) 764

M.KATJU, R.B.MISRA
BISHESHWAR SINGH ALIAS KALLOO – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/collector, SHAHJAHANPUR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ramendra Asthana

M. KATJU, R. B. MISRA, JJ.

( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.

( 2 ) PETITIONER operated the theka but he has not paid the theka dues. He has filed this writ petition alleging that theka dues cannot be recovered as arrears of land revenue. Even assuming that the said dues cannot be recovered as arrears of land revenue, we are not inclined to interfere under article 226 of the Constitution of India. There is no dispute that the petitioner has operated the theka but he has now raised a technical ground to obtain stay order by filing this writ petition.

( 3 ) WRIT jurisdiction is discretionary. Since the petitioner has operated the theka and collected the money, there is no equity in his favour.

( 4 ) PETITION is dismissed.


.

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