Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Sagir Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing proceedings of the case. (Para 1) |
| 2. overview of family relation and holdings. (Para 2) |
| 3. petitioner claims entitlement to plot no. 619. (Para 3) |
| 4. respondents argue for equitable adjustment. (Para 4) |
| 5. judicial consideration of arguments presented. (Para 5) |
| 6. recognition of plot no. 619's ownership status. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 7. court's decision to uphold earlier judicial findings. (Para 8) |
| 8. law on allotment of roadside plots in consolidation. (Para 9) |
| 9. no interference warranted in the impugned order. (Para 10) |
| 10. final dismissal of the writ petition. (Para 11) |
JUDGMENT :
Chandra Kumar Rai, J.
1. Heard Mr. Srikrishna Mishra assised by Mr. Mohd Mohiuddin Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Tawvab Ahmed Khan, learned counsel for contesting respondent nos. 4 and 5 and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner and respondent no.3 are real brother. Respondent nos. 4 and 5 are the nephew of the petitioner. Petitioner is chak holder No. 1564 and original holdings of the petitioner are plot Nos. 619, 637, 606M, 652, 589M, total area 0.594 hectare. Petitioner was proposed single chak on plot Nos. 652 and
The allotment of roadside plots under consolidation laws must reflect the shares of each holder without illegality in the decision-making process.
The allotment of chak under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act must adhere to the legal provisions regarding equitable distribution among co-sharers, as confirmed in the case.
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.
The court upheld the legality of Chak allotment under the U.P.C.H. Act, affirming adherence to principles of rectangulation and consideration of irrigation sources.
The court emphasized that tenure holders must be allocated chaks on original plots, and procedural fairness requires proper hearing and substitution of deceased parties in consolidation disputes.
The court upheld the adjustment of chak allotment based on original tenure rights and comparative hardship, affirming the authority's jurisdiction under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.
The court upheld the Deputy Director's decision on plot allotment based on proper share considerations under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, affirming procedural fairness in the revision proc....
Roadside land either to be excluded from consolidation operation or to be included in the chak of that chak holder who held it as original.
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
