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

2018 Supreme(All) 1888

P.K.S.BAGHEL
Abu Nasar – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :Ranjeet Asthana, Advocate

JUDGMENT & ORDER :

PRADEEP KUMAR SINGH BAGHEL, J.

1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for the following reliefs:

(i) issue a writ or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding to the Respondent no. 2 not to disposes the petitioner from gata no.444 area 500 kari, situated in village Koilari Bujurg Tehsil Mehnagar District Azamgarh in the interest of justice;

(ii) issue a writ or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding to the respondent No. 3 to decide the application of the petitioner filed under rule 109 of the C.H. Act during pendency of the present writ petition, in the interest of justice."

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Consolidation Officer vide order dated 22.8.2017 has decided his objections under Section 9-A(2) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 but the said order has not been carried out in the revenue records. The petitioner has moved an application under Rule 109 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1954. When no action was taken he has also approached the Deputy Director, Consolidation on 15.2.2018. A copy of the application, which bears the order passed by the D.D.C. dated 16.2.2018 directing the Consolidation O







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