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

2008 Supreme(All) 2067

RAJES KUMAR
POORAN SINGH – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, MEERUT – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
R.P. Mishra for the Petitioner; V.K. Singh, Rajesh Kumar, S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Rajes Kumar, J.—Heard Sri R.P. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, Sri V.K. Singh. learned counsel appears on behalf of respondent No. 3 and Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appears on behalf of respondent No. 4.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since there was error in the preparation of the map an application was moved under Section 42-A of the Act for the correction. Consolidation Officer after considering the claim of the petitioner found that the mistake was apparent on the face of record and in exercise of power under section 42-A of the Consolidation and Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) passed the order dated 17.10.2006, Annexure-2 to the writ petition. It appears that by order dated 17.10.2006 right of the Hemraj has been effected and, therefore, he tiled revision under Section 48 of the Act before Deputy Director of Consolidation, who by the impugned order dated 22.10.2007 allowed the revision mainly on the ground that the publication under Section 52 of the Act has been made much earlier, therefore, Consolidation Officer has no power to















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