Back
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Ravi – Appellant
Versus
State Of UP – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Chandra Kumar Rai, J.
1. Heard Sri Awadh Behari Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri B.N. Pathak, learned standing counsel for the state-respondents.
2. With the consent of learned counsel for the petitioners and learned standing counsel, the instant writ petition is being heard & disposed of finally without inviting counter affidavit.
3. Brief facts of the case are that one Shyamraji widow of Kumar executed a registered sale deed on 14.10.1985 with regard to the house situated in village -Hengapur and another sale deed was executed by Shyamraji on 30.11.1991 in respect to plot no-411/0.142 kari, 5M/0.145 kari, 6M/0.028 kari, 7M/0.004 kari situated in village-Hengapur, Tehasil-Sadar, Pergana -Nizamabad, District -Azamgarh. The Assistant Consolidation Officer vide order dated 16.1.1992 ordered to record the name of petitioners in place of Shyamraji under Section -12 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as "U.P.C.H. Act"). After death of Shyamraji, the name of predecessor of respondent nos-4 to 6 were ordered to be recorded in case under Section -12 of U.P.C.H. Act, vide order dated 20.5.1992 as successor of Shyamraji over the land
The finality of earlier orders under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act must be respected, and due process must be followed in land record matters.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation exceeded jurisdiction by not considering the limitation and locus standi of the respondents in appeals under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.
The court upheld the necessity of procedural fairness in consolidation proceedings, emphasizing that all parties must be afforded the opportunity to present their case and evidence.
The Deputy Director of Consolidation has jurisdiction to restore revisions for adjudication; adherence to procedural fairness and inclusion of all parties is mandated under the U.P. Consolidation of ....
The court affirmed the principle that title objections must be decided on merit rather than based on previous compromises, ensuring fair opportunity for parties to present evidence.
Revisional jurisdiction under consolidation laws requires adherence to legal procedures, especially concerning time-barred claims and the provision of interim protection.
The principles of natural justice require that a recorded tenure holder must be afforded an opportunity to be heard before their rights to land are altered or cancelled.
Failure to provide a hearing and frame issues as required by the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act renders the adjudication void.
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
