Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAVI SHANKER & ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ravi Shanker & Another v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 31063 of 2003 [2006] RD-AH 5792 (9 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

Hon.Shishir Kumar, J.

    The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order-dated 9.12.1999 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition) by which the names of the petitioner has been scored out.

   The petitioners submit that they are landless persons and are in possession of the land about 20 to 25 years and their names have been recorded and by virtue of their possession the petitioners' have acquired right of non transferable bhommidhari rights, therefore, the District Magistrate, Mirzapur has got no jurisdiction to pass an order scoring out the name of the petitioners from the revenue record.

A clear averment has been made in Para 12 of the writ petition that before passing the order dated 9.12.1999, no notice and opportunity has been given to the petitioner.  The said averment made in the writ petition has not been denied in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel and have perused the record.

Admittedly, from the order it appears that the order has been passed by the District Magistrate, Mirzapur in a cryptic manner without assigning any reason, as such, it will be presumed that the order dated 9.12.1999 is an order of non application of mind.  That too the petitioner who is in possession of the land in dispute, no notice and opportunity has been given to the petitioner, as such, the order dated 9.12.1999 is an order against the principle of natural justice without affording an opportunity to the petitioners.

In view of the aforesaid fact, the order dated 9.12.1999 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition) is quashed and the matter is remitted back to the competent authority to pass appropriate orders after affording an opportunity to the petitioner.  As submitted by the petitioner that the District Magistrate, Mirzapur, respondent No1 has got no jurisdiction to pass this order, it will be upon to the petitioner to raise an objection regarding the jurisdiction of the District Magistrate, Mirzapur whether he has any competence to pass order.    

With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

9.3.2006

SKD/31063/2003      

Hon.Shishir Kumar, J.

    The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order-dated 9.12.1999 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition) by which the names of the petitioner has been scored out.

   The petitioners submit that they are landless persons and are in possession of the land about 20 to 25 years and their names have been recorded and by virtue of their possession the petitioners' have acquired right of non transferable bhommidhari rights, therefore, the District Magistrate, Mirzapur has got no jurisdiction to pass an order scoring out the name of the petitioners from the revenue record.

A clear averment has been made in Para 12 of the writ petition that before passing the order dated 9.12.1999, no notice and opportunity has been given to the petitioner.  The said averment made in the writ petition has not been denied in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel and have perused the record.

Admittedly, from the order it appears that the order has been passed by the District Magistrate, Mirzapur in a cryptic manner without assigning any reason, as such, it will be presumed that the order dated 9.12.1999 is an order of non application of mind.  That too the petitioner who is in possession of the land in dispute, no notice and opportunity has been given to the petitioner, as such, the order dated 9.12.1999 is an order against the principle of natural justice without affording an opportunity to the petitioners.

In view of the aforesaid fact, the order dated 9.12.1999 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition) is quashed and the matter is remitted back to the competent authority to pass appropriate orders after affording an opportunity to the petitioner.  As submitted by the petitioner that the District Magistrate, Mirzapur, respondent No1 has got no jurisdiction to pass this order, it will be upon to the petitioner to raise an objection regarding the jurisdiction of the District Magistrate, Mirzapur whether he has any competence to pass order.    

With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

9.3.2006

SKD/31063/2003      

Hon.Shishir Kumar, J.

    The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order-dated 9.12.1999 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition) by which the names of the petitioner has been scored out.

   The petitioners submit that they are landless persons and are in possession of the land about 20 to 25 years and their names have been recorded and by virtue of their possession the petitioners' have acquired right of non transferable bhommidhari rights, therefore, the District Magistrate, Mirzapur has got no jurisdiction to pass an order scoring out the name of the petitioners from the revenue record.

A clear averment has been made in Para 12 of the writ petition that before passing the order dated 9.12.1999, no notice and opportunity has been given to the petitioner.  The said averment made in the writ petition has not been denied in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel and have perused the record.

Admittedly, from the order it appears that the order has been passed by the District Magistrate, Mirzapur in a cryptic manner without assigning any reason, as such, it will be presumed that the order dated 9.12.1999 is an order of non application of mind.  That too the petitioner who is in possession of the land in dispute, no notice and opportunity has been given to the petitioner, as such, the order dated 9.12.1999 is an order against the principle of natural justice without affording an opportunity to the petitioners.

In view of the aforesaid fact, the order dated 9.12.1999 (Annexure 2 to the writ petition) is quashed and the matter is remitted back to the competent authority to pass appropriate orders after affording an opportunity to the petitioner.  As submitted by the petitioner that the District Magistrate, Mirzapur, respondent No1 has got no jurisdiction to pass this order, it will be upon to the petitioner to raise an objection regarding the jurisdiction of the District Magistrate, Mirzapur whether he has any competence to pass order.    

With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

9.3.2006

SKD/31063/2003      


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.