Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
IRSHAD ALI
Sahab Das Objection Filed – Appellant
Versus
Additional Commissioner judicial Lucknow Division – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's sc labourer possession pre-1995 cutoff established. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. ex-parte recall by ex-pradhan violated notice requirement. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. revision ignored ex-parte order and challenger locus. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. revisional interference unwarranted; natural justice essential. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. claim invalid: forgery, reservation, delay, alternative remedy. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 6. precedents: 122-b(4f) deems sc bhumidhari rights. (Para 32 , 33) |
| 7. revisional order void for jurisdictional error. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
| 8. quash revision; restore for fresh hearing. (Para 45 , 46) |
JUDGMENT :
IRSHAD ALI, J.
1. Heard Sri Abhisht Saran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shatrughan Chaudhary, learned Additional CSC for respondent - State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 10.08.2004 passed by respondent No.1 contained as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition.
3. Factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner is a landless agricultural labourer
Deeming provision under Section 122-B(4-F) confers bhumidhar rights on eligible Scheduled Caste landless labourers; ex-parte recalls invalid; no revision against such orders or restorations thereof.
The recall of benefits granted under Section 122B (4-F) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act is impermissible without following proper legal procedures.
The judgment establishes the importance of considering the rights and protections provided to agricultural laborers belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under Section 122-B(4-F) of the ....
The court affirmed the entitlement of the petitioner to Bhumidhar rights under the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, emphasizing the importance of recognizing statutory protections for marginalized community memb....
The authority's order beyond jurisdiction is void; the previous order remains intact while directing a merits-based decision on the pending application.
Possession for over 12 years confers sirdari rights; established orders must be recognized by revenue authorities to amend records suitably.
The court upheld the rights of agricultural laborers under Section 122-B(4-F) of the U.P. Zamindari Act, ruling that the disputed plots were not acquired by the State, thus confirming their status as....
Proper issue framing and evidence assessment are essential in land rights claims; failure to do so necessitates remand for lawful adjudication.
The revisional jurisdiction under Section 9 of the ROR Act cannot be exercised after a long delay, and the settled rights of a person under the ROR Act cannot be unsettled after a lapse of more than ....
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
