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

2007 Supreme(All) 2671

SHISHIR KUMAR
GYANENDRA KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Anil Sharma for the Petitioner; C.B. Yadav, S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Shishir Kumar, J.—The petitioner has approached this Court for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 15.11.1990 passed by respondent No. 2 in Appeal No. 11 of 1989-90, Annexure 7 to the writ petition.

2. A notice under Section 10 (2) of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act (in short the Act) was served upon the petitioner calling upon him to show cause as to why the area of 2.64 acres be not declared as surplus land under the provisions of the Act. In the aforesaid notice the total holding of the petitioner was shown as 20.66 acres and permissible area of the petitioner was shown as 18.02 acres. It has been stated that the holding of respondent No. 3 was also clubbed by the Prescribed Authority. An objection to that effect was filed by the petitioner that the notice is wrong as there are five members in the family of the petitioner. It was also stated in the objection that Smt. Chaman Deye is not the family member of the petitioner. Further it was stated that during the consolidation operation the plot number has been changed and the notice has been given only on the basis of old plots. It has further been stated that the land which bel













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