Back
JASPREET SINGH
Shivam Eint Udyog – Appellant
Versus
Addl. Commissioner (Administration), Ayodhya – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
JASPREET SINGH, J.
1. Heard Shri H.N. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Hemant Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri Abhineet Jaiswal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 4.
2. By means of the instant petition, the petitioners assail the order dated 06.12.2023 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tahsil Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar whereby an application preferred by the petitioners under Section 80 of the U.P. Revenue Code 2006 has been rejected, as not maintainable. The said order was further challenged in a revision before the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Ayodhaya, which also met the same fate by order dated 07.06.2024.
3. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that he had moved his application seeking declaration that the land in question be declared as non-agricultural in terms of Section 80 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 on 21.10.2023. It has further been submitted that the order rejecting the application by the Sub Divisional Magistrate is primarily on the ground that in light of Section 80 (8) of the Code of 2006, the application has been held to be not maintainable as
The court upheld the rejection of the petitioners' application for land declaration due to lack of prior permission, emphasizing the importance of notification dates and authority discretion under th....
The court emphasized that quasi-judicial authorities must adhere to procedural integrity, and any order based on false representations is void.
The court held that a lease for land with multiple co-owners must be executed by all co-owners to be valid, and a declaration of non-agricultural use does not imply legal partition of the land.
The last contention regarding n on applicability of provisions of the Act to a land which is permitted to be converted into n on agricultural land by a competent Court also merits acceptance in light....
Authority under Gujarat Land Revenue Code cannot assess land title when considering applications for Non-Agricultural permission; the focus must remain on occupancy rights.
The U.P. Revenue Code's provisions regarding appeals are self-contained and govern the necessity of filing documents, overriding general procedural requirements of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Civil Courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate matters involving non-agricultural land, despite the U.P. Revenue Code's provisions, as the rejection of the plaint was deemed unlawful.
Point of law: Whenever the Land Management Committee intends to admit any person to land under Section 195 or 197, it shall announce by beat of drum in the circle of the Gaon Sabha in which the land ....
Conditions imposed under Section 80 of the U.P. Land Revenue Code must align with statutory provisions, and failure to do so results in a lack of legal authority.
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
