Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
ALOK MATHUR
Mohd. Jahid – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Raebareli – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges consolidation order (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. arguments about procedural irregularities (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. examination of remand legality (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. procedural rules for remand (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. case law governing remand authority (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 6. deputy director's discretion in remanding cases (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 7. conclusion: writ petition dismissed (Para 33 , 34 , 35) |
JUDGMENT :
ALOK MATHUR, J.
1. Heard Shri R.S. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Ankit Pandey for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent no.1, Shri Dileep Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and Shri Desh Deepak Singh and Ms. Aniveksha Shukla holding brief of Shri Ashish Chaturvedi for the private respondents.
2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 27.6.2025 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, District Raebareli in exercise of power under Section 48 (1) of Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 remanding the matter back to the trial court for decision afresh.
3. It has been submitted by learned co
The court affirmed the authority of the Deputy Director of Consolidation to remand cases for fresh decisions when evidence requires further inquiry, underscoring the need for thorough examination bef....
The Deputy Director of Consolidation must adhere to remand orders and consider all relevant records and admissions before making decisions regarding co-tenancy rights.
(1) Deputy Director of Consolidation has jurisdiction to interfere with finding on facts of subordinate authority only when said findings are perverse or not supported by any evidence on record or co....
The Deputy Director of Consolidation's remand for a fresh hearing was justified to ensure fairness, given the significant delay and procedural irregularities in prior decisions.
It is well known that "conclusions" and "reasons" are two different things and reasons must show mental exercise of authorities in arriving at a particular conclusion. In Union of India v. Mohan Lal ....
Tenure Land - Once a dispute was recorded by Assistant Consolidation Officer and on objection being filed same was referred to Consolidation Officer, it is incumbent to Consolidation Officer to decid....
The failure to frame issues and allow evidence in property disputes violates procedural fairness, necessitating remand for proper adjudication.
The court ruled that title objections under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act must be decided on merit, emphasizing the need for proper jurisdiction and evidence rather than relying on alleged c....
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
