Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
JASPREET SINGH
Himanshu Dhar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. chronology of litigation involving landholding dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. multiple rounds of litigation regarding land ownership. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. re-determination of surplus land after remand. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. filing of writ petition based on earlier judgments. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 5. petitioner’s arguments concerning jurisdiction and amendments. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. impact of amendments on land tenure and ceiling. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 7. res judicata concerning earlier findings on excess land. (Para 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 8. state’s arguments substantiating jurisdiction for re-determination. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 9. preserved authority to re-assess land holdings. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 10. summary of earlier proceedings and respondent's counterarguments. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 11. undisputed facts leading to the issues raised. (Para 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 12. examination of statutes and amendment implications. (Para 45 , 46 , 47 , 48) |
| 13. case law pertaining to the determination of surplus land. (Para 49 , 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 14. legal implications of findings prior to amendments. (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56) |
| 15. applicability of res judicata in la |
The court affirmed that changes in the U.P. Ceilings Act necessitate a re-determination of surplus land in adherence to legislative amendments, disallowing re-litigation on previously settled land is....
The authorities must provide reasoned judgments, adhering to statutory definitions of land classification to ensure fair judicial processes in surplus determinations.
The court confirmed that bid lands are included under the definitions of 'land' and 'agriculture' in the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, reaffirming the limited scope of remand orders.
The court reaffirmed that once a matter has been adjudicated and reached finality, further litigation on the same issue is barred by res judicata.
Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act does not permit retroactive scrutiny of land transfers pre-dating statutory cut-off; failure to follow judicial precedents constitutes a breach of natural j....
Prescribed Authority and the Appellate Court did not have valid or sufficient grounds for rejecting the revised choice indicated by the petitioner because the choice can be revised till such time his....
The court clarified that subsequent ceiling proceedings do not annul earlier proceedings unless explicitly stated, highlighting legislative intent.
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
