Back
YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Mohd. Yasir Ali Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard Sri Shreeprakash Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri J.N. Maurya, learned Chief Standing Counsel appearing alongwith Sri Abhishek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, for the State-respondents and Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent No. 5.
2. The present petition has been filed primarily seeking to assail the order dated 13.07.2023, passed by the respondent No. 3, the Naib Tehsildar, Panwadia, Tehsil Sadar, Rampur, in Case No. 35 of 2023, in proceedings under Section 34 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 [the Code] and the subsequent order dated 04.12.2023, passed by the respondent No. 2, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Sadar, Rampur, in Case No. 3689 of 2023, an appeal under Section 35(2) of the Code, whereby the earlier order has been affirmed.
3. Counsel appearing for the State respondents and also the counsel appearing for the respondent No. 5, have raised an objection with regard to the entertainability of the writ petition by pointing out that the order passed in appeal, under Section 35(2) of the Code, would be subject to the statutory remedy of a revision under Section 210 of
The court ruled that an appeal under Section 35(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code is subject to revision under Section 210, emphasizing the supervisory role of the Board or Commissioner over subor....
The court established that restoration proceedings under the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 are valid despite the enactment of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, emphasizing jurisdictional competence and subs....
A revision under Section 210 of the UP Revenue Code is not maintainable unless the impugned order constitutes a 'suit or proceeding decided'.
The right to appeal or revise under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 1950, remains intact for suits filed before the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, emphasizing that such rights are substant....
Objections to jurisdiction must be raised at the earliest opportunity, and failure to do so results in waiver; appeals under the UP Revenue Code must follow the prescribed procedures, and jurisdictio....
The right to avail the remedy of revision under Section 333 of the Act of 1950 survives the repeal of the Act of 1950 and, therefore, the revision is maintainable.
The Tehsildar's order in mutation proceedings is appealable under Section 35(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, not revisable under Section 210.
The U.P. Revenue Code's provisions regarding appeals are self-contained and govern the necessity of filing documents, overriding general procedural requirements of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the first appeal under Section 207 of the U.P. Revenue Code-2006 cannot be filed against an order passed under Section 24, and the appeal can ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
