Back
JASPREET SINGH
Pawan Kumar Chaube – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. Thru. Prin. Secy. , Deptt. Of Revenue, Lucknow – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jaspreet Singh, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of the respondents no.1 and 2 has been accepted by the office of the Chief Standing Counsel. Shri Mohan Singh, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no.4. Shri Ashish Raman Mishra, learned counsel has appeared on caveat on behalf of the private respondent no.3.
2. Under challenge is the order dated 03.08.2024 passed by the Tehsildar, Tehsil Alapur, District Ambedkar Nagar in proceedings under Section 34 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
3. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the mutation proceedings were initiated by the private respondent no.3. In the said proceedings, the present petitioner had filed his objection. In the said proceedings, the petitioner had put in appearance and had sought time to file his objections.
4. It has been pointed out that the matter was listed on 22.07.2024 and since the Members of the Bar were abstaining from the judicial work, the next date fixed was 05.09.2024. It is submitted that an application was moved allegedly under the signatures of the petitioner status that the applicant be granted time to engage Shri
The court reaffirmed the necessity of a fair hearing in judicial proceedings, emphasizing that no order should be made without affording all parties the opportunity to present their case.
Judicial proceedings must follow prescribed procedures; failure to document and hear parties leads to invalid orders, undermining public trust in the justice system.
An order passed without issuing notice to involved parties and without condoning delay is jurisdictionally incorrect, violating principles of procedural fairness.
The court emphasized that orders affecting rights must follow due process, ensuring fair opportunity for all parties before any decision is made.
Writ petitions against mutation orders are maintainable if they violate natural justice or are issued without jurisdiction, reaffirming the need for proper procedural adherence in land revenue matter....
It well settled that any defect in signing memorandum of appeal or any defect in the authority of the person signing the memorandum of appeal, or omission to file vakalatnama executed by appellant, a....
The court affirmed that mutation proceedings are summary in nature and do not determine substantive rights, allowing for alternative remedies under the U.P. Revenue Code.
Judicial integrity must be maintained through consistency in orders, and manipulation of judicial records undermines the rule of law and public confidence.
Judicial officers must uphold promptitude and integrity, as failure to register cases and comply with court orders constitutes dereliction of duty.
Orders must adhere to principles of natural justice, and failure to do so renders them invalid.
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
