Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD AT LUCKNOW BENCH
Rajan Roy, Om Prakash Shukla
Career Convent Education and Charitable Trust – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's claims of encroachment and procedural violations. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding the maintainability of appeals and revisions. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. analysis of the retrospective effect of notifications and jurisdictional authority. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 4. quashing of the notification and remanding proceedings for fresh consideration. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
| 5. final order allowing the writ petition in part. (Para 44 , 45 , 46 , 47) |
JUDGMENT :
Om Prakash Shukla, J.
1. Supplementary counter affidavit filed today by Shri Manish Mishra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State, is taken on record.
2. We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners Mr. Gaurav Mehrotra, learned Advocate assisted by Mr. Amit Jaiswal, Ms. Maria Fatima, Ms. Manjari, and Mr. Aditya Singh, and Shri Manish Mishra, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.
3. The petitioner is an educational institution. Its campus is spread over an area of nearly 15 lakhs square feet of which a small part i.e. 5080 square feet i
The court found that the notification empowering the Tehsildar with retrospective effect was invalid due to lack of legal basis and failure to follow procedural requirements under the U.P. Revenue Co....
The right to avail the remedy of revision under Section 333 of the Act of 1950 survives the repeal of the Act of 1950 and, therefore, the revision is maintainable.
Admittedly, under Section 122-B of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1950, similar provisions existed and powers of the Assistant Collector under the said Acts were delegated to the Tehsildars. In State of ....
The court reinforced that statutory remedies must be exhausted before invoking the High Court's extraordinary jurisdiction in matters of land encroachment.
The U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 applies to areas under Nagar Panchayats, and the availability of a statutory alternative remedy precludes the entertainment of a writ petition.
The impugned notice lacked the basic element of opportunity to the noticee to rebut and defend the allegation imposed against him, and proposed an action to be taken under a non-applicable provision ....
Fresh proceedings under the Revenue Code can be initiated based on new evidence of encroachments, despite prior proceedings being dropped due to the petitioner's father's death.
The court established that restoration proceedings under the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901 are valid despite the enactment of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, emphasizing jurisdictional competence and subs....
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
