Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BALJEET SINGH versus DY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, BIJNOR & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Baljeet Singh v. Dy. Director Of Consolidation, Bijnor & Others - WRIT - B No. 16783 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 6720 (28 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

Court No.40

Hon'ble S.N.Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for caveator.

Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the impugned order of Deputy Director of Consolidation was passed without considering the grievance of the petitioner and chak allotted upto the stage of Settlement Officer Consolidation was disturbed without application of mind .

Learned Counsel for the Opp.Party urged that the dispute is between father and the son.  He further urged that the order was rightly passed in accordance with law.  In reply, learned counsel for petitioner urged  on the basis of Paragraph 21 of the writ petition that  father of petitioner is residing in Canada and one Surendra Singh of the village has filed case on behalf of his father without any power of attorney or any  authority.  

Considered the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for Caveator and also perused the entire materials on record.

From perusal of record, it is clear that there is no application of mind by Deputy Director of Consolidation about grievance of the parties. Impugned order is also non-speaking.

In the facts of the case, this Court considers it appropriate to set aside the order-dated 31.12.2005 and remand the matter to Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bijnor for passing appropriate orders after considering the grievance of the parties.   The Deputy Director of Consolidation shall also decide the questions, which may be raised by the parties including the question of maintainability of revision filed by Surendra Singh on behalf of father of petitioner  as mentioned in paragraph 21 of writ petition.

With the result, writ petition succeeds and is allowed.  Impugned order dated 31.12.2005 is quashed.  Deputy Director of Consolidation, Bijnor shall decide the case afresh in accordance with law after hearing both the parties within three months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.  

Dt.28.3.06

SU/16783/06

Group-B


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.