Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Simru And Others v. Commissioner And Others - WRIT - C No. 19030 of 1987 [2006] RD-AH 2541 (1 February 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court no. 31

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 19030 of 1987

Simru and others vs. The Commissioner, Meerut & ors.


Hon'ble Bharati Sapru, J.

This petition has been filed against the order dated 4.9.1987 passed by the Commissioner under section 27 (4) of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960. By this order the Commissioner has cancelled the allotment of Gaon Sabha land made in favour of the petitioners and allotted the same to the respondents who are landless Harijan by caste.

It is the contention of the petitioners that they are Kahar by caste who have been allotted land of Gaon Sabha on 18.7.1983. The allotment in favour of the petitioners was upheld by the order of Addl. Commissioner dated 18.2.1985 and thereafter the order was passed in review on 13.8.1985 by which also the land was confirmed in favour of the petitioners.

The present proceedings started on the basis of an application dated 31.10.1986 moved by the respondents by which they claim that they were landless Harijan and applied for grant of Gaon Sabha land. The petitioners filed their objections to the application filed by the respondents on 31.10.1986 raising their claim that they had a better right to get the land of the Gaon Sabha.

The Additional Commissioner however has come to the conclusion on facts that four petitioners came in category ''D' of section 198 whereas the respondents belong to category ''C' of section 198 and therefore they have a better claim. The Additional Commissioner in his order dated 4.9.1987 clearly recorded a finding that the respondents are Harijan by caste and they had no land and as such they come within the category ''C' of section 198 and therefore respondents have a better right to be granted as the section itself says that the following order of preference shall be kept.

Learned standing counsel has argued that section 198 itself provides for an order of preference in admitting persons to allot land under section 195 and 197 and therefore persons in category ''C' rightly speaking have a better claim than the person situated in category cD'.

In view of the above, I am of the opinion that the order of the Addl. Commissioner contains no error or illegality and in fact he has rightly allowed the appeal of Harijan in category ''C' by which he had cancelled the allotment made earlier. It is now open to make fresh allotment of Gaon Sabha land in accordance with law.

For the reasons mentioned above, the writ petition is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.

Dated 1.2.2006



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.