Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DOST MOHD. versus D.D.C. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Dost Mohd. v. D.D.C. & Others - WRIT - B No. 6407 of 1974 [2007] RD-AH 9312 (16 May 2007)

 

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. Janardan Sahai,J

Heard Ms. Archana Hans holding brief of Sri A.S.Diwakar counsel for the petitioner.

This petition has been filed against an order of the Dy. Director of Consolidation dated 28.7.73 allowing the revision of the respondent Saha Alam who was allotted a chak on plot nos. 467 and 468. It appears that the respondent Shah Alam was dissatisfied with the chak allotted to him on the ground that it was a multi cornered one and therefore he wanted the modification of his chak. It appears that plot no.470 was khalihan. Shah Alam's demand was to transfer the khalihan to plot nos. 467 and 468 and  the allotment of plot no.470 to him. Plot nos. 467 and 468 also were of high level land and adjoined the abadi and the village road and therefore it was prayed that these lands are suitable for khalihan. From the order of the Dy.Director of Consolidation, it appears that the Gaon Sabha was agreeable to this change.  By the impugned order the Dy.Director of Consolidation has directed that plot no.470 which was entered as Khalihan be allotted to chakholder no.375 the respondent Shah Alam and the khalihan be transferred on plot nos.467 and 468 earlier allotted to the respondent Shah Alam.

The petitioner has filed the present petition  alleging that in the basic year the plots in dispute are in the name of the petitioner. However, no papers in this regard have been filed. Under Section 19A of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act the land of the gaon sabha can be allotted in the chak of a tenureholder but if there are public rights on the land of the gaon sabha so allotted to a private tenure holder the public rights have to be transferred on other land. This right of the villagers has been secured in the impugned order as the khalihan and chak marg  has been transferred to other plots. The order therefore does not suffer from any error which may call for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.Dismissed.

Dt: 17.5.07sm

wp 6407/74


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.