Disposed

Ram Tirth and Another v. State of U P and 7 Others

Allahabad HC25 Apr 2018WRIC/14911/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking mutation of names in revenue records without expressing an opinion on merits. An objection was raised regarding the lack of a formal application under the U.P. Revenue Code. The Court granted liberty to move such an application.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioners to move an appropriate application for correction in revenue records within three weeks.

Ram Tirth and Another Vs State of U P and 7 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14911 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Ram Tirth And Another Respondent :- State Of U P And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kamlesh Prasad Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent.

¶6

Petitioners are before this Court with the request to command the second and third respondents to mutate the name of petitioners in Arazi no.708 and 709 situated in Village Bharaha, Pargana Arail, Tehsil Karchhana, District Allahabad and Arazi no.337 situated in the same Village and possession may be handed over to both the parties on their respective shares.

¶7

At the very outset, Shri Abhishek Shukla, learned Standing Counsel raised an objection that for correction/mutation of their names in the revenue records, there is full fledged mechanism provided under Section 32/28 of the U.P. Revenue Code 2006 wherein an incumbent, who is inclined for correction in the revenue records, he should move a proper application before the Revenue Authorities and in the present case, at no point of time any such application has been moved by the petitioners and as such, no relief should be accorded to the petitioners.

¶8

Confronted with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that some reasonable time may be accorded to the petitioners so that appropriate application under Section 32/38 of U.P. Revenue Code 2006 can be moved for redressal of grievance of the petitioners.

¶9

In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to move an appropriate application for correction in the revenue records along with certified copy of this order before the competent authority within three weeks from today and in case any such application is moved, this Court hopes and trust that the competent authority would consider and decide the same in accordance with law, expeditiously, without according any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, except upon payment of cost.

¶10

Order Date :- 25.4.2018 A. Pandey

Ram Tirth and Another v. State of U P and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Tirth and Another v. State of U P and 7 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

Ram Singh and 6 Others Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate Phoolpur and 6 Others

Vivek Das Vs Tehsildar(Judicial) Harraiya Basti and 2 Others

Mool Chandra and Another Vs State of U P and 3 Others

jugal kishor alias ravi Vs State of U.P. and 3 others

rampal singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 others

Anil Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others