Disposed

Onkarnath and 3 Others v. Deputy Director of Consolidation and 2 Others

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2021WRIB/193/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that interest of justice requires the petitioners to be given a fresh hearing regarding disputed land parcels. It remitted the matter to the Deputy Director of Consolidation to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; deputies remitted to Deputy Director of Consolidation, Prayagraj, for fresh hearing and order within 3 months.

Onkarnath and 3 Others Vs Deputy Director of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 193 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Onkarnath And 3 Others Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manik Chandra Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

The impugned order dated 24.11.2020 while rejecting the application of the petitioners for recall of the order dated 30.11.2007 finds that the disputed parcels of land comprise a pond. This finding has been rendered on the foot of various documents, revenue entries by the competent authorities. The order dated 30.11.2007 also considers the objections submitted by the petitioners.

¶6

Sri Manik Chandra Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners were not afforded an opportunity of hearing.

¶7

Learned Standing Counsel contends that all the pleadings as well as relevant documents and revenue entries were considered before passing the impugned orders dated 24.11.2020 and 30.11.2007.

¶8

Sri O.P. Krishna Sood, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Azad Rai, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 adopts the argument of the learned Standing counsel.

¶9

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, interest of justice will be served if the petitioners are given an opportunity of hearing afresh by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Prayagraj. At this stage, in

¶10

light of the findings rendered by the courts below, no cause is shown to quash the impugned orders dated 24.11.2020 and 30.11.2007, as it could alter the status of the disputed parcels of land.

¶11

Consequently, the matter is remitted to respondent No.1-Deputy Director of Consolidation, Prayagraj.

¶12

A writ in the nature of mandamus is issued commanding the respondent No.1-Deputy Director of Consolidation, Prayagraj to execute the following directions:

¶13

The respondent No.1-Deputy Director of Consolidation, Prayagraj shall give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

¶14

The impugned orders dated 24.11.2020 and 30.11.2007 shall abide by the order to be passed in pursuance of this direction.

¶15

The exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of production of a computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the website of High Court, Allahabad. The computer generated copy of such order be self attested by the petitioner (party concerned) along with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked. The authority/official shall verify the authenticity of such computerised copy

¶16

of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. .

¶17

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is finally disposed of.

¶18

Order Date :- 22.2.2021 Ashish Tripathi

¶19

Court No. - 6

¶20

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 193 of 2021

¶21

Petitioner :- Onkarnath And 3 Others Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manik Chandra Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶22

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶23

(Order on Civil Misc. Impleadment Application No.Nill of 2021) Heard.

¶24

Impleadment application is allowed.

¶25

Necessary impleadment be carried out during the course of the day.

¶26

Order Date :- 22.2.2021 Ashish Tripathi

Onkarnath and 3 Others v. Deputy Director of Consolidation and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Onkarnath and 3 Others v. Deputy Director of Consolidation and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Km. Savita Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Gangaram Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate and Another

Sanoj Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Noor Mohammad and 19 Others Vs District Deputy Director of Consolidation and Another

Amit Kumar and Another Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Lallu Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others