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


Rangi Lal & Others v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 30807 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 10905 (4 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.51)

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.30807 of 2006

Rangi Lal & Others Vs.  State of U.P. and others


This writ petition is directed against order dated 25.2.2006 passed by Chief Revenue Officer, Basti canceling allotment in favour of the petitioners and others dated 23.10.1996 on the ground that the land which was allotted to the petitioner was pond.  It has further been directed that the land must be entered as pond in the revenue record and copy of the order should be sent to all the allottees/opposite parties for information and notices must be issued for vacation of the pond.  

In the impugned order it is mentioned that it is being passed in pursuance of Supreme Court judgment in Hinch Lal Tewari vs. Kamla Devi and others 2001 (3) A.W.C. 2398 (S.C.).

The main grievance of the petitioners is that they were not heard before passing of the said order. It is quite clear from the impugned order itself that petitioners were not heard.

It is fundamental principle of natural justice that no order shall be passed against a person without hearing him.

Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file application for post decisional hearing and for recall of order dated 25.2.2006 before Chief Revenue Officer, Basti. In the application petitioners shall take all such pleas which are available to them and shall annex all such documents on which they want to place reliance.    If such an application is filed by the petitioner within one month from today then Chief Revenue Officer shall hear the matter and in case he finds that the petitioners have been able to make out a good case then must recall his order dated 25.2.2006 otherwise it shall be maintained.  Petitioners shall file the aforesaid application within one month from today and the said application shall positively be decided within two months from the date of its filing.

For a period of three months petitioners shall not be evicted.  If other similarly situate allottees also file similar applications then those applications should also be heard and decided accordingly.




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.