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

2021 Supreme(All) 1740

DINESH PATHAK
Fakiran – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director Of Consolidation – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Awadhesh Kumar Singh
For the Respondent: C.S.C.

JUDGMENT :

Dinesh Pathak, J.

1. Heard Sri Awadhesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel represents responded nos. 1 & 2 and perused the record.

2. Petitioners have filed the instant writ petition invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 23.09.2020 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent no.1).

3. Considering the facts of the case, question for consolidation in the instant writ petition lies in a narrow compass as to whether Deputy Director of Consolidation (respondent no.1) has justified in remitting the matter before Settlement Officer of Consolidation (respondent no.2) to search the original record of the court subordinate first and fix the responsibility of erring employees.

4. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that Fakiran and others (petitioners) have preferred an appeal dated 04.09.2000 against the order dated 10.01.1995 and 05.12.1994 passed by Consolidation Officer in a proceeding under Section 9 -A(2) of UPCH Act in Case No.1424 of 1994. Since the date of filing of aforesaid appeal i.e. 04.09.2000, no order could be passed du

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top