KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA
Leellu – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J.
1. Heard Shri Amish Kumar Srivastava along with Ms. Sanju Lata, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondents and Shri Kaushal Kishore Mani, learned counsel for respondent No. 4.
2. The petitioner has made two prayers in the writ petition. The first prayer is for quashing of the order dated 04.01.2023, whereby the Tehsildar concerned has directed eviction of the petitioner in the proceedings under section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and also imposed penalty to the extent of Rs. 1,36,600/-. The second prayer is for deciding the restoration application filed by the petitioner on 16.01.2023 seeking recall of the order dated 04.01.2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Tehsildar, Nakud, Saharanpur issued a notice dated 26.12.2022 in purported exercise of powers under section 67 (2) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 calling upon the petitioner to remove his alleged unauthorised possession within a period of two days fixing 28.12.2022 at 10.00 a.m. for compliance of notice and to show cause. The n
Fairmount Investments Ltd. vs. Secretary to State for Environment
G.B. Mahajan vs. Jalgaon Municipal Council
Indian Express Newspapers Bombay (P) Ltd. vs. Union of India
Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India
Rajendra Singh vs. State of M.P. (1996) 5 SCC 460
R. vs. Secretary of State for Home Affairs Ex Parte Hosenball
Supreme Court Employees Welfare Assn. vs. Union of India
State Bank of Patiala vs. S.K. Sharma
Tata Cellular vs. Union of India
U.P. Financial Corporation vs. Gem Cap (India) (P) Ltd. (1993) 2 SCC 299
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.