Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Chandra Kumar Rai
Mahipal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh at Prayagraj – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing of clubbed writ petitions (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. explanation of laches in filings (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. background of agricultural lease dispute (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. arguments from petitioner and respondent (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. court's review of arguments (Para 9 , 10) |
| 6. analysis of finding of fact by board (Para 11 , 12) |
| 7. court's dismissal of the writ petitions (Para 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT :
Chandra Kumar Rai, J.
1. Heard Mr. Sudhir Kumar Kulshreshtha, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Anupam Kulshreshtha, learned counsel for respondent no.4/9, Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, learned counsel for respondent-Gram Sabha and Mr. Arunesh Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
2. Common issues are involved in both the aforementioned writ petition, as such, both the writ petitions are clubbed and heard together.
3. Stamp Reporter has reported laches of 1654 days in filing the Writ B No. 442 of 2025 as well as Writ B No. 444 of 2025.
4. Petitioner has explained the laches in para Nos. 21 to 27 of the writ petition which is not satisfactory but in place of dismissing the writ petition on the ground of laches, the matter should be decided on merit.
5. Brief facts of the case are that
The Board of Revenue correctly upheld agricultural allotments following proper procedures, and significant delays in filing petitions do not warrant judicial intervention.
The court upheld the validity of agricultural allotment made in 1975-76, emphasizing that findings of fact by authorities require no interference unless proven perverse.
The court affirmed the agricultural lease granted to the petitioner, ruling that cancellation was arbitrary and lacked proper individual consideration, especially given the petitioner's eligibility a....
The Collector can cancel land allotments without notice if acting on his own motion, as per the U.P. Revenue Code, ensuring procedural compliance.
The statutory requirement of notice before lease cancellation is crucial; failing to comply invalidates such actions, reinforcing principles of due process.
Cancellation of an agricultural lease based on time-barred complaints is legally impermissible, emphasizing adherence to statutory time limits as per U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act.
The court established that residents can challenge land allotments as 'persons aggrieved' under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, emphasizing the importance of public interest in suc....
Mandatory provisions for cancellation of leases require notice and opportunity for hearing, underscoring the importance of due process.
The cancellation of land leases after a significant delay violates statutory provisions and principles of reasonable time, affirming the rights of long-term lessees under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition....
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
