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

2024 Supreme(All) 1876

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
Kedar and Others - Petitioners
Versus
D.D.C. and Others - Respondents
WRIT B NO. 14185 OF 1986.
Decided On : 05-01-2024

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: A.S. Rai.
For the Respondent: U.K. Misra, Kunal Ravi Singh, S.C., Udai Bhanu Singh.

Authorities must provide adequate opportunity for parties to present their case; decisions made in haste without hearing can lead to prejudice.

Headnote:(A) Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 - Section 48 - Consolidation proceedings - Petitioners challenged ex-parte order allowing revision without hearing them, claiming prejudice due to haste of Revisional Authority - Court found that the authority acted incorrectly by not granting adjournment and decided the case without proper hearing. (Paras 17, 21, 22)

(B) Legal principles - Authorities must provide adequate opportunity for parties to present their case; decisions made in haste without hearing can lead to prejudice. (Paras 20, 22)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners contested an ex-parte order dated 29.05.1982 by the Revisional Authority, which allowed a revision petition filed by the respondents without hearing the petitioners, leading to claims of manipulation and denial of justice.

Findings of Court:
The Revisional Authority's decision was set aside due to lack of proper hearing and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration.

Issues: The main issues were whether the Revisional Authority acted in haste and whether the petitioners were denied a fair opportunity to present their case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that decisions must be made after hearing all parties, and haste in proceedings can result in significant prejudice.

Result: Writ petition partly allowed; orders set aside and remitted for fresh decision.

JUDGMENT

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.

This case is arising out of consolidation proceedings. In the basic year, over plot no. 421 area 1 acre 73 decimal situated at village Kodari, Pargana Bayalasi, Tehsil Kerakat, District Jaunpur, name of original petitioner's father Dallan was recorded.

2. Opposite parties no. 5 to 9 filed their objections before the Consolidation Officer that they along with the petitioners belong to a joint family and disputed land was joint family property and as such they claimed co-tenancy right in the disputed land.

3. The Consolidation Officer by an order dated 23.03.1967 rejected the objections of respondents under Section 9A(2) of Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 and entries of basic year were confirmed. Relevant part of the order is quoted below :-

    ^^mHk; i{k dh mifLFkfr esa eqdnesa dh lquokbZ dh x;h rFkk muds }kjk izLrqr ekSf[kd o fyf[kr lk{; dks fefly ij fy;k x;kA mHk; i{k dh cgl lquh x;hA oknhx.k dh vksj ls Qjhdsu dk oa'k o`{k fuEu izdkj dgk x;k gSA

    oknh dh vksj ls cgl djrs gq, fo}ku vf/koDrk us dgk gS fd nYyu eS eTtu xTtu ds lkFk e; ofYn;r l:i ds ,d nkok okn la0 88 nQk 59 ;w0ih0 esa nYyu dh tkfr dk FkkA dCtsnkj byyhxy cgr djrs gq, fo}ku odhy us dgk fd mDr nkok esa nYyu us eTtu o xTtu dks l:i dk yM+dk fy[kk gSA vr% ;g izekf.kr gS fd oknhx.k izfroknhx.k ds HkkbZ rFkk oa'k o`{k ds e`rd dze'k% Hkrhts gSaA

    mijksDr cgl ls izekf.kr gS fd oknhx.k izfroknh ds firk ds gh oa'kt gSaA

    tgka td lg [krsnkjh dk iz'u gS fd izfroknh dh vksj ls dgk x;k fd fookfnr Hkwfe muds }kjk izkIr dh x;h vkSj oknhx.k us crkSj ljek;k [kkunku dh gSfl;r ls fookfnr Hkwfe dks izfroknh }kjk izkIr crkrsA mls vius dks lg[kkrsnkj crk;k oknh dh vksj ls fn;s x;s c;ku ls Li"V gksrk gS fd oknhx.k o izfroknhx.k vyx&vyx jgrs gaA ,slh fLFkfr esa mHk; i{k ds la;qDr gksus rFkk izfroknh }kjk lcdh vksj ls crkSj ekfyd ds dk;Z dks is'k djds fLFkfr fujk/kkj gSA oknh dh vkifÙk O;FkZ gSA

    vr% vkns'k gqvk fd [kkrk ua0 12 l 109 ls xTtu bR;kfn dh vkifÙk [kkfjt gks uacj 191@2@&02 xS0e0'kk0tks ntZ gks okn vey njken fefly nkf[ky n¶rj gksA**

[emphasis supplied]

4. Contesting respondents being aggrieved by the above order filed an appeal before Settlement Officer of Consolidation, however, it was dismissed on 08.09.1967. A copy of said order is not annexed along with this writ petition. The above order was challenged at behest of the respondents by way of filing a revision petition.

5. The petitioners filed a transfer application before Deputy Director of Consolidation, Jaunpur as revision petitioner was pending for many years, however, same was rejected by an order dated 12.05.1982 with a direction to parties to appear on 31.05.1982.

6. Case of petitioners is that the Revisional Authority who was at verge of his retirement has expedited the proceedings and rejected prayer of adjournment and proceeded with revision petition and decided by an ex-parte order dated 29.05.1982 whereby revision was allowed. Relevant part of the order is mentioned below:-

    ^^mijksDr lk{;ksa ij izdk'k Mkyrs gq, fo0 vf/koäk us cSukek fnukad 26-12-60 ls ;g fn[kkus dh dksf'k'k dh x;h gS fd blesa nyu ds cki dk uke Lo:i o xtu Hktu ds cki dk uke vuq:i gSA cSukek fy[kkrs le; nyu ekStwn Fks vkSj ckdh HkkbZ xtu Hktu iq= x.k vuq:i ugha FksA vkSj nyu dh pkykdh ls ofYn;r vyx&vyx ntZ djk fn;kA ;g Hkh dgk x;k fd ;g cSukek dh udy gS vkSj vly ds xk;c gksus dk dksbZ lk{; ugha fn;kA

    vr% ;g lk{; esa xzkg; Hkh ugha gSA nwljs cSukek fnukad 21-01-68 esa ntu iq= vuq:i fy[kk gS bldk Hkh dksbZ vU; lk{; ugha gSA fuxjkuhdrkZvksa us ;g crk;k gS fd Lo:i vkSj vuq:i ,d gh O;fDr gSA Hktu ds c;ku esa Hkh firk dk uke vuq:i fy[kk gSA blls Hkh dksbZ varj ugha gSA D;ksafd vuq:i vkSj Lo:i ,d gh O;fDr gS ;g c;ku Hkh lk{; esa xzkg; ugha gS D;ksafd Hktu dks ryc djds iwNrkN ugha dh x;hA ;g Hkh dgk x;k fd fuxjkuhdrkZvksa us c;ku rgjhjh Li"V fy[kk gS fd nyu vius Hkkb;ksa esa lcls cM+s FksA vuq:i dh udy QkSrh Hkh nkf[ky gS ftlds vuqlkj mudh e`R;q fnukad 06-03-58 dks gqbZ gSA nyu ds c;ku ls Hkh Li"V gS fd

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 Back to top