Disposed

Badan Singh v. Commissioner Agra and 18 Others

Allahabad HC2 Apr 2018WRIC/11843/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction under Section 28 of UP LR Act regarding demarcation of land. Court examined if a prior order was ex-parte, found it was not, and disposed of the petition on consent directing the Revisional Authority to decide the revision with hearing. Rimanded to decide within four months.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of directing the Revisional Authority to decide Revision no.105/2011 expeditiously, preferably within four months, after providing opportunity of hearing to all parties.

Badan Singh Vs Commissioner Agra and 18 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11843 of 2018 8639 Petitioner :- Badan Singh Respondent :- Commissioner Agra And 18 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashish Kumar Srivastava

¶3

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Shri Ashish Kumar Srivastava, Advocate appearing for Gaon Sabha.

¶5

Petitioner is before this Court with the request to command the first respondent to decide the Revision no.105/2011 under Section 28 of the UP LR Act (Badan Singh vs. Biri Singh and others) within stipulated period.

¶6

Learned Counsel for the petitioner informed to the Court that the private respondents had approached this Court by preferring Writ Petition no.55615/2016 (Biri Singh and another vs. State of U.P. and others) asking the respondents to measure and demarcate the plot no.172 area 1.787 hectare situated at village Rithora, Tehisl Krwali District Agra. He further apprised to the Court that the said writ petition has been disposed of vide order dated 24.11.2016 asking the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Kerawali, District Agra to examine the matter and if an application has been filed for demarcation of the plot no.172 area 1.787 hectare situated at village Rithora, Tehisl Kirawali District Agra with the amended map dated 04.07.2013, he shall decide the same in accordance with law and after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to all the parties to the lis.

¶7

In this backdrop, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the private respondents at no point of time has arrayed the petitioner as a party in the aforesaid writ petition and as such, the aforesaid writ petition was disposed of ex-parte. He further submits that neither the proceeding under Section 28 of the UP LR Act has been finalized, nor the application, as has been asked for by this Court, has

¶8

been decided by the Revisional Authority and as such, request has been made to ask the authority concerned to look into the matter and finalize the aforesaid proceeding.

¶9

Once a complaint has been made that the order dated 24.11.2016 has been passed ex-parte to the petitioner, this Court proceeds to peruse the order dated 24.11.2016 and finds that adequate precaution has been taken while disposing of the aforesaid writ petition wherein the Court has asked the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned to examine the matter and if an application has been filed for demarcation of the plot no.172 area 1.787 hectare situated at village Rithora, Tehisl Kirawali District Agra with the amended map dated 04.07.2013, he shall decide the same in accordance with law and after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to all the parties to the lis and as such, it cannot be said that the aforesaid order has been passed ex-parte to the petitioner.

¶10

Confronted with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that direction may be issued to the Revisional Authority to decide the aforesaid revision at the earliest.

¶11

Learned Standing Counsel has not opposed the said prayer.

¶12

In view of the above, without entering into the merit of the case, the writ petition, on consent, stands disposed of directing the Revisional Authority to decide Revision no.105/2011 expeditiously, preferably within four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order but certainly after providing opportunity of hearing to all the parties to the lis.

¶13

Order Date :- 2.4.2018 A. Pandey

Badan Singh v. Commissioner Agra and 18 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badan Singh v. Commissioner Agra and 18 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karunendra Sachan Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Yadav Pooja Kamala Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Akanksha Solanki Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Murari Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Durga Prasad Rai Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sandeep Kumar Vs Gaon Sabha Bangaon, Pargana Ghisuva and 2 Others