Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAMESHWAR & OTHERS versus THE COMMISSIONER, CONSOLIDATION & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Rameshwar & Others v. The Commissioner, Consolidation & Others - WRIT - B No. 28930 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 10116 (23 May 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. S.N. Srivastava, J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Standing Counsel.

Learned counsel for petitioners urged that consolidation had already taken place in the village and majority of villagers have already represented to the Director of Consolidation, U.P., that there is no need of reconsolidation in the village, inspite of the same a notification was made on 18th November, 2005 in exercise of power under Section 4-A(1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act for reconsolidation of the village in question.  He further urged that the impugned notification for reconsolidation issued under Section 4-A(1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act is highly arbitrary and beyond powers conferred under Section 4-A(1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.  It is further urged that once consolidation has taken place in the village, it is not in the public interest that village in question be notified for reconsolidation.  He also urged that the impugned notification is wholly unwarranted and is liable to be quashed.

Issue notice to Opp. Party no.4.  Petitioners shall take steps to serve Opp. Party no.4 by Regd. Post within within a week.

Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is granted a month's time to file counter affidavit.  He will place before the Court criteria for issuing notification under Section 4-A(1) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act for reconsolidation in the village, justification of reconsolidation and will also produce Amendment introduced through U.P. Act No. 35 of 1976 dated 15.6.1976, Aims and Object for introduction of this Amendment by which Section 4-A of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act was introduced.  Rejoinder Affidavit may be filed within two weeks' thereafter.

Till further orders of the Court, consolidation proceedings in pursuance of the notification dated 18th November, 2005, Annexure-2 to the writ petition, shall remain stayed.

List for further orders on 24th July, 2006

23.5.2006

bgs/-28930


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.