Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. KAMALA DEVI versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Kamala Devi v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 54943 of 2000 [2005] RD-AH 2576 (8 September 2005)

 

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.37

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 54943 of  2000

Smt. Kamala Devi v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others.

Hon'ble R.K.Agrawal, J.

Hon'ble (Mrs.) M.Chaudhary, J.

The proceeding under the Urban Land (Ceiling  and Regulation) Act, 1976, hereinafter referred to as the Act,  was initiated and vide order dated 23rd February, 1982 and area of 9889 sq.mts. of land belonging to Awadhu, son of Mathura was declared as surplus.  The petitioner is the daughter of Late Awadhu, who died on 7th May, 1992.  It is worthwhile to mention here that the petitioner's father Late Awadhu did not take any steps to challenge the order dated 23rd March, 1982 declaring the land as surplus. After his death, the petitioner who claims to inherit the land by will filed an appeal on 19th April, 1994 before the District Judge, Gorakhpur, being Appeal No.471 of 1994, which was also rejected on 29th November, 1995. The matter rested there as the petitioner in her wisdom did not choose to challenge the order dated 29th November, 1995 in any further proceedings.  After the Ordinance was promulgated by the Government of India repealing the Act in the year 1999, the petitioner filed an application on 20th December, 1999 before the Prescribed Authority for entering her name in the revenue records, which was rejected. Thereafter the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking the benefit of  repeal of the Act.

We are afraid, any benefit can be taken from the repeal of the Act inasmuch as on the date when the Ordinance was promulgated no  proceedings whatsoever was pending.  

This writ petition is misconceived and is dismissed.

8.9.2005

mt


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.