Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

JAGLAL versus DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Jaglal v. Deputy Director Of Consolidation And Others - WRIT - B No. 57219 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 17752 (16 October 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.  57219 of 2006

Jaglal...............Petitioner

Versus

Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gorakhpur  & Others........Respondents

Hon'ble Krishna Murari,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Challenge in this petition has been made to the order dated 10.7.2006 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation remanding the case back to the Settlement Officer Consolidation .

During chak allotment proceedings, an appeal filed by the petitioner was allowed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation vide order dated 31.3.2001. Aggrieved, the respondent no. 2 went up in revision. The Deputy Director of Consolidation  vide order dated 10.7.2006 allowed the revision and remanded the case back to the appellate Court for fresh decision.

A perusal of the judgment of the Settlement Officer Consolidation  filed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition goes to show that it is totally devoid of any reasons. The only reason given by the Settlement Officer Consolidation  while allowing the appeal filed by the petitioner was that the claim of the petitioner appears to be genuine. Apart from above, there is no discussion in the judgment of the Settlement Officer Consolidation .

The revisional Court found that by the impugned judgment, revisionist (respondent no. 2 herein) was deprived of the land adjacent to the chak road and his chak was made L-shape.

Since, the judgment passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation  was totally devoid of any reasons, the revisional court has rightly allowed the revision and remanded the case back for fresh decision and I find no illegality in the same.

The writ petition accordingly fails and is dismissed in limine.

Dt.16.10.2006


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.