SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(MP) 75

SANJAY DWIVEDI
Manoj Patel – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Munish Saini for petitioners; Girish Kekre, Govt. Advocate for respondents.

ORDER

1. Since pleadings are complete, record of ceiling proceeding is also available, therefore, with the joint request of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally.

2. By the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are challenging the order dated 31.1.2022 (Annexure-P/9) passed by the competent authority/respondent No.2 whereby the authority rejected their application preferred under Section 4 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (for short the ‘Act, 1999’) for declaring the proceeding initiated by the respondents abated in respect of vesting the land of original owner in the State under the provisions of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short the ‘Act, 1976’).

3. The facts of the case in short are that respondent No.2 for declaring the land of original owners namely Buddhulal Patel and Panchamlal Patel to be surplus, instituted a case under the provisions of the Act, 1976 which got registered as Case No.217/A-90(B-9)/81-82. Since the said proceeding was initiated only against Buddhulal Patel, therefore, he not only objected the same but also denied vesting of land in the St

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top