Back
SAURABH LAVANIA
Siddh Nath – Appellant
Versus
Additional Commissioner-Iiird Devi Patan Mandal Gonda – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Saurabh Lavania, J.
Heard.
2. In view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court, notice to the private-respondent No. 4 is dispensed with.
3. By means of the present petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 02.01.2023 passed by the opposite party No.1-Additional Commissioner-IIIrd, Devi Patan Mandal, Gonda in Revision No. 541 of 2017, Computerized Case No.C20170800541 (Dharnidhar Pandey & others v. Radhyeshyam), filed under Section 219 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 (in short "Act of 1901") and the order dated 27.07.2017 passed by the opposite party No.2-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil-Payagpur, District-Bahraich, in the demarcation proceedings initiated under Section 41 of the Act of 1901.
4. It is stated that an application under Section 41 of the Act of 1901 was filed for demarcation by Radhey Shyam (opposite party No.4), which was allowed vide order dated 27.07.2017 by the opposite party No.2. This order was passed without providing proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, as such, the petitioners preferred a revision under Section 219 of the Act of 1901 and the revisional authority without considering the relevant aspects of the
The court emphasized that failure to provide notice and consider objections in administrative proceedings violates natural justice, allowing for judicial intervention despite alternative remedies.
The failure to notify a necessary party in land demarcation proceedings violates the principles of natural justice, necessitating a fresh examination of the case.
The principles of natural justice require proper notice and opportunity to be heard before decisions affecting rights are made; failure to comply invalidates proceedings.
Parties accepting land demarcation via signed joint statement on spot cannot subsequently object or appeal, as Section 107(7) H.P. Land Revenue Act bars challenges when no objections raised during pr....
Quasi-judicial authorities must provide reasons for their decisions, as the reason is essential for a valid conclusion.
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
