Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAMESH AND OTHER versus BOARD OF REVENE, U.P. AT ALLAHABAD & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ramesh And Other v. Board of Revene, U.P. at Allahabad & others - WRIT - B No. 24614 of 1988 [2006] RD-AH 5436 (7 March 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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 24614  of  1988

Ramesh & others vs. Board of Revenue, U.P. at Allahabad & others

Hon'ble Krishna Murari, J.

Heard Sri S.C. Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

The dispute relates to plot no. 3M area 31.61 acres situate in village Madanpur district Kheri. A suit under Section 229-B of the U.P.Z.A & L.R Act (for short ''the Act') was filed by the petitioners claiming to be the Bhumidhars of the land in dispute. The suit was contested by the respondents on the ground that notification under Section 4 & 20 of the Forest Act was issued and the land in dispute was declared to be a reserved forest and the petitioners have no concern with the land. It was further pleaded that under the notification issued, the suit was not maintainable. A preliminary issue regarding maintainability of the suit was framed. The trial court vide order dated 26.8.1984 decided the preliminary issue in negative and held that the suit was not maintainable. The appeal as well as second appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner and Board of Revenue respectively.

The issue involved is squarely covered by a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of U.P. vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation & others, 1996(87) RD 448. In the said case the issue involved was whether the consolidation authorities have the jurisdiction to go beyond the notification under Section 20 of the Forest Act and deal with the land which has been declared and notified as a reserved forest under the Act. The Hon'ble Apex Court after analyzing the various provisions of the Forest Act has observed as follows "

"It is thus obvious that the Forest Settlement Officer has the powers of a civil court and his order is subject to appeal and finally revision before the State Government. The Act is a complete code in itself and contains elaborate procedure for declaring and notifying a reserved forest is published. Once a notification under Section 20 of the Act declaring a land as reserved forest is published, then all the rights in the said land claimed by any person come to an end and are no longer available. The notification is binding on the Consolidation Authorities in the same way as a decree of the civil court. The respondents could very well file objections and claims including objection regarding the nature of the land before the Forest Officer. They did not file any objection or claim before the authorities in the proceedings under the Act. After the notification under Section 20 of the Act, the respondents could not have raised any objections qua the said notification before the Consolidation Authorities. The Consolidation Authorities were bound by the notification which had achieved finality."

In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the suit filed by the petitioner under Section 229-B of the Act claiming declaration of the Bhumidhari rights was not maintainable and has rightly been dismissed by the courts below and the impugned judgments do not suffer from any infirmity.

The writ petition accordingly, fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Dt.7.3.2006


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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