RAJEEV MISRA
Imtiyaz Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rajeev Misra, J.
Heard Mr. Saumitra, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Rahul Sahai, the learned counsel for petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents-1,2,3 and Mr. Vijay Bhan Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. R.P. Shukla, the learned counsel representing respondent-4.
2. Perused the record.
3. Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 20.6.2023, passed by respondent-3, Assistant Collector/Tehsildar, Ballia, in Case No.266 of 2023 (Gram Sabha v. Imtiyaz and Others) under Section 67 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) as well as the order dated 13.10.2023, passed by respondent-2 District Magistrate/Collector, Ballia in Appeal No. 1102 of 2023 (Imtiyaz Ahmad and Others v. Gram Sabha Turtipar and Others) under Section 67 (5) of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition), whereby aforesaid appeal filed by petitioners against the order dated 20.6.2023 has been dismissed.
4. At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel for state respondents-1,2,3 and Mr. Vijay Bhan Singh Advocate, holding brief of Mr. R.P. Shukla, the learned counsel representing respondent-4, Gaon Sabha submit that present writ petition may be d
Eviction proceedings under U.P. Revenue Code cannot proceed without proper land demarcation, and damages awarded must be based on a justified assessment.
The court ruled that revenue authorities must diligently evaluate evidence and properly calculate damages in eviction proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code.
Eviction orders under the U.P. Revenue Code require measurement and demarcation to establish illegal possession; failure to do so renders such orders unsustainable.
Authorities must adhere to statutory provisions and consider beneficial legislation in eviction proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code.
Judicial proceedings must adhere to due process, including the right to be heard and the requirement for evidence to be properly substantiated.
Judicial proceedings must adhere to due process, including providing notice and opportunity to be heard, failing which decisions are invalid.
Possession of public utility land does not confer rights; damages must be calculated according to legal standards.
The court affirmed the eviction order but quashed the damages due to lack of conclusive evidence and procedural irregularities in the assessment of damages.
Damages awarded for illegal possession must be substantiated by evidence; failure to prove the Halka Lekhpal's report renders the damages arbitrary.
No rights can accrue over public utility land based on long possession; damages must be calculated according to established rules.
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.