JAGAN SINGH versus DY. DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, ALIGARH & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

Jagan Singh v. Dy. Director Of Consolidation, Aligarh & Others - WRIT - B No. 46487 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 14482 (28 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. 46487 of 2006

Jagan Singh     vs.     Dy. Director of Consolidation & others

Hon'ble Krishna Murari, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Challenge in this petition made to the order dated 12.9.2003 and 17.5.2006 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation.

The facts are that against the order passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation allowing large number of appeals by a common order, a revision was filed by the petitioner. In the said revision, a compromise dated 30.8.2003 between the petitioner and contesting respondent no.4 was filed. On the same day, an application was filed by respondent nos. 5 & 6 before the Deputy Director of Consolidation stating therein that their appeal no. 91/7 is pending before the Settlement Officer Consolidation  and any order in the revision on the basis of compromise arrived at between the petitioner and respondent no.4 may be passed after decision of their appeal by the Settlement Officer Consolidation. The said application was allowed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation vide order dated 12.9.2003. The petitioner filed an application to recall the same which has been dismissed vide order dated 17.5.2006.

The Deputy Director of Consolidation in the order dated 17.5.2006 has recorded a finding that the alleged compromise does not bear the signature of respondent no.4 but it has been signed by his son who had no jurisdiction to enter into the compromise on behalf of his father. It has further been held that if any order is passed on the basis of the compromise that may affect the pending appeal.

In view of the aforesaid facts, the Settlement Officer Consolidation is directed that the revision shall be decided only after hearing of the appeal. Since there has been no final adjudication by the Deputy Director of Consolidation  and the matter is still pending, I am not inclined to interfere at this stage.

However, considering the facts and circumstances, it is directed that the appeal pending before the Settlement Officer Consolidation said to have been filed by respondent nos. 5 & 6 shall be decided by him within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him.

Subject to aforesaid, the writ petition stands dismissed.

Dt.28.8.2006

Nd/wp-46487-06

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 |

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