Back
DINESH PATHAK
Lallu Singh – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director Of Consolidation – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Dinesh Pathak, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record. Office is directed to proceed accordingly.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and learned standing counsel for the State respondents.
3. Aggrieved with the order dated 28.5.2024 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation (in brevity 'DDC') in a revision arising out of proceedings under Section 21 (1) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (in brevity 'UPCH Act'), the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition.
4. Facts culled out from the record are that in the provisional consolidation scheme, the present petitioner (Lallu Singh) has been proposed chak No.1099 at three places; the first chak consisting of plot nos.199, 200, 201 and 202 etc., the second chak has been proposed over plot nos.602, 603 and 604 etc.; and the third chak has been proposed over plot nos.351 and 352 totalling 15 plots measuring area 2.151 hectares. Likewise Krishna Autar Sharma (respondent No.2) has been proposed chak No.108 at two places; the first chak at plot nos.262/1, 262/2, 263 etc. and the second chak on plot no.766, tota
The court upheld the DDC's order on chak allotment, finding no substantial displacement of the petitioner or loss of irrigation sources, emphasizing the need for evidence to support claims.
The court upheld the D.D.C.'s order modifying chak allotments, affirming that administrative decisions should not be interfered with unless clear illegality or injustice is shown.
The court upheld the Deputy Director's adjustments in land allocation, finding no violation of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, as petitioners failed to show prejudice or illegality.
The modification of plot allocation that renders it unfit for cultivation contradicts the purpose of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, requiring respect for original allocations essential for e....
The court upheld the Deputy Director of Consolidation's order regarding chak allotment, emphasizing that no prejudice was shown by the petitioner and that the D.D.C. acted within legal provisions.
The court mandated reconsideration of land allotment claims, emphasizing the necessity of a fair hearing for all affected parties under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.
A chak holder's entitlement can only be altered where existing agricultural rights and irrigation sources are preserved, underscoring the importance of statutory compliance in land allocation.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation must consider comparative hardship when exercising revisional jurisdiction under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.
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
