Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
CHANDRA KUMAR RAI
Chandradeiya – Appellant
Versus
Board Of Revenue – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Chandra Kumar Rai, J.
1. Heard Mr. Ashutosh Singh, Advocate holding brief of Mr. L.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Anjani Kumar Chaurasia, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for respondent- Gram Sabha.
2. The name of complainant/ respondent no.3, Bhrigu Singh has been deleted on the basis of application filed on behalf of the petitioners.
3. Brief facts of the case are that petitioners along with others were granted agriculture lease in view of the Family Planning Scheme of the Government in respect to plot No. 208 and 205 situated at Village Majhauna, Pargana Sikanderpur Garvi, Tehsil Rasra, District Ballia which was recorded as naveen parti in the revenue records. The lease executed in favour of petitioners was approved by Sub Divisional Magistrate on 26.12.1986. The possession of the plot in question was delivered in favour of the petitioners in the year 1986- 87. One Bhrigu Singh filed a complaint in the year 2000 in respect to the lease executed in favour of petitioners and on the basis of aforementioned complaint, the case No. 570 of 2000 was registered under Section 19
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.
Cancellation of agricultural lease after 11 years is barred by limitation, highlighting the importance of timely legal challenges in the context of land allotment under relevant laws.
The statutory requirement of notice before lease cancellation is crucial; failing to comply invalidates such actions, reinforcing principles of due process.
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....
Cancellation proceedings initiated after the limitation period are time-barred and cannot be entertained.
A revision filed after a significant delay is an abuse of process, and the cancellation of a lease under the U.P.Z.A.&L.R. Act is final, barring further claims for possession.
Petitioner failed to establish rights over land, resulting in dismissal of writ petition upholding earlier judicial findings.
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....
Mandatory provisions for cancellation of leases require notice and opportunity for hearing, underscoring the importance of due process.
The cancellation of a lease without affording a proper hearing violates principles of natural justice, warranting judicial intervention and remand for fresh consideration.
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
