Back
JASPREET SINGH
Farook – Appellant
Versus
Addil. Commissioner (Administration), Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jaspreet Singh, J.
1. Heard Sri Aftab Ahmad learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the State respondent as well as Sri Ravindra Kumar Yadav learned counsel for the private respondent no.5 as also Sri Mohan Singh learned counsel on behalf of respondent Gaon Sabha.
2. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner assails the order dated 28.10.2022 passed by the Collector, Ambedkar Nagar rejecting the application of the petitioner filed under Section 30 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 and order dated 14.05.2024 whereby the revision preferred by the petitioner was also dismissed.
3. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that under Section 30 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, it is the Collector who is obligated to maintain the map, field book for each village and also maintain said record. It is submitted that the petitioner had moved an application before the Collector, Ambedkar Nagar indicating that the map relating plot no.332 situated in village Patna, Mubarakpur, Pargana Birhar, Tehsil Alapur District Ambedkar Nagar needs to be corrected. It is urged that on the said application a report from the Naib Tehsildar dated 03.01.2019 and
A petitioner must demonstrate locus standi and personal interest in the matter to maintain a petition regarding land records, especially when the land is vested in a public authority.
The Supreme Court affirmed that issues previously settled cannot be re-litigated under Section 30 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code unless substantial errors arise, thereby preventing unnecessary lit....
The Collector has a statutory duty to correct errors in revenue records, including maps, without discretion to refuse corrections based on administrative manuals.
The principle of res judicata does not preclude a subsequent application for correction of land records under Section 30 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
The court ruled that revenue authorities must diligently evaluate evidence and properly calculate damages in eviction proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code.
Summary proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code cannot adjudicate title disputes; petitioners may seek declaration of rights through a regular suit.
Eviction proceedings under U.P. Revenue Code cannot proceed without proper land demarcation, and damages awarded must be based on a justified assessment.
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
