Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NANDU & OTHERS versus THE DY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, GORAKHPUR & 5 OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Nandu & others v. The Dy. Director Of Consolidation, Gorakhpur & 5 Others - WRIT - B No. 41082 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 12794 (2 August 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

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 41082 of 06

Nandu & others........Petitioners

Versus

Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ghazipur

& Others........Respondents

Hon'ble Krishna Murari, J.

Heard Sri Swaraj Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ranjit Asthana, Advocate appearing for respondents no. 3, 4 and 5.

During the chak allotment proceedings, two appeals were filed before the Settlement Officer Consolidation, one by petitioners and other by the contesting respondents. Against the orders passed by the appellate Court, two revisions were filed. The revision filed by the contesting respondents was numbered as revision no. 284 whereas the revision filed by the petitioners was numbered as revision no. 797/05-06. The revision filed by the contesting respondents was decided vide order dated 26.6.2006 passed by respondent no. 1, which has been impugned in the present writ petition.

It has been urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners that since the dispute between the parties who are co-sharers, was with regard to allotment of chak appropriately, both the revisions ought to have been decided together by the Deputy Director of Consolidation. However, the revision of the contesting respondents was decided illegally whereas the revision of the petitioners has been left untouched virtually rendering it infructuous.

Learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents concedes to the point that both the revisions ought to have been decided together by the Deputy Director of Consolidation.

Considering the aforesaid facts, the impugned order dated 26.6.2006 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gorakhpur in Revision No. 284 allowing the revision filed by the contesting respondents, is hereby quashed. The writ petition stands allowed. The matter is remanded back to the Deputy Director of Consolidation to consolidate both the revisions filed by the petitioners as well as contesting respondents and to decide them together in accordance with law expeditiously.

Dt. 2.8.2006


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.