Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Jaspreet Singh
Mohammad Faizal – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jaspreet Singh, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Upendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent and Shri Rajendra Singh Chauhan, learned counsel has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondents no.5 and 6 which is taken on record.
2. In pursuance of the earlier order dated 04.12.2024 passed by this Court Shri Aakash Pandey, Naib Tehsildar, Baksi-Ka-Talab, Lucknow is present in person alongwith the original record. The order dated 04.12.2024 reads as under:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The learned Standing Counsel has provided a copy of the written instructions for perusal of the Court which is taken on record.
However, from the perusal thereof, a query made by the Court has not been clearly explained as to under what circumstances, the order came to be passed on 09.10.2024 wherein the matter was already listed on 22.10.2024.
The Naib Tehsildar, BKT, Lucknow shall appear alongwith the original records on 06.12.2024.
List/put up this matter on 06.12.2024, as fresh."
3. From the perusal of the original record, it indicates that a hand written order was passed by the Presiding Officer on 09.10.2024, indicating that the counse
Judicial integrity must be maintained through consistency in orders, and manipulation of judicial records undermines the rule of law and public confidence.
Judicial proceedings must follow prescribed procedures; failure to document and hear parties leads to invalid orders, undermining public trust in the justice system.
Orders must adhere to principles of natural justice, and failure to do so renders them invalid.
An order passed without issuing notice to involved parties and without condoning delay is jurisdictionally incorrect, violating principles of procedural fairness.
Restoration applications for ex-parte decrees are maintainable and do not abate under the U.P.C.H. Act, even if consolidation operations are ongoing.
The court ruled that an ex parte order requires a recall application to be maintainable, emphasizing the need for parties to be heard before any interim orders are issued.
Judicial orders must be made with integrity and transparency, and any manipulation or procedural irregularity undermines the validity of such orders.
The court emphasized the necessity of providing all parties an adequate opportunity to be heard in judicial proceedings, ruling that procedural irregularities render decisions unsustainable.
A suit for declaration under Section 144 of the U.P. Revenue Code cannot be decided without framing issues and allowing evidence, and orders passed without jurisdiction are nullities.
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
