Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Rajendra Singh v. Upper Collector (Admn.) & Others - WRIT - C No. 54374 of 2004 [2006] RD-AH 12303 (26 July 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).


                                                                               Court No.38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 54374 of 2004

Rajendra Singh           Vs.          Upper Collector (Administration)

  & others

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J

Brief facts relating to this case are that on a report submitted by the Lekhpal, a notice was given by the Tehsildar to the petitioner and after considering the reply as well as on perusal of record, by order dated 15.1.2004 the proceedings against the petitioner were dropped. Thereafter on some application filed by respondent no. 5, the order dated 15.1.2004 was recalled on 15.5.2004 without notice to the petitioner. Challenging the said order the petitioner filed a revision which has been dismissed on 30.11.2004. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents no. 1 and 2, Sri V.K.Singh for respondent no. 3, Sri Mahtab Alam for respondent no. 4 and Sri N.S.Chahar for respondent no. 5. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.  

The short question involved in this writ petition is that whether the order passed in favour of a party could have been recalled without notice to the said party.

Admittedly, the order dated 15.1.2004 was passed in favour of the petitioner. It is also not disputed that the order dated 15.5.2004 had been passed without notice to the petitioner. It is well settled law that in case if some rights have accrued in favour of a party by passing of some order, the same cannot be withdrawn, recalled or modified without following the principles of natural justice and without giving notice to such party before passing any such order.

In the present case since admittedly the order dated 15.5.2004 had been recalled behind the back of the petitioner without affording him any opportunity, the same deserves to be set aside.

Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed and the order dated 15.5.2004 passed by the Tehsildar, Tehsil Iglas, district Aligarh, respondent no. 2 as well as the order dated 30.11.2004 passed by the Additional Collector (Administration), Aligarh, respondent no. 1 are both quashed.

The Tehsildar, respondent no. 2 shall be free to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other concerned parties and considering the evidence which may be adduced by the parties.

No costs.





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


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 |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.