Dismissed

Chandra Bhushan Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2022WRIB/3087/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a writ petition challenging a revisional order by the Deputy Director of Consolidation that set aside a prior settlement officer order and remanded the matter for a fresh decision with proper hearing. No interference with the review order was permitted.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; Settlement Officer directed to decide the case within three months from the date of producing the certified copy of this order.

Chandra Bhushan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 3087 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Chandra Bhushan Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivakant Singh,Ram Swaroop (Singh) Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C,Rishikesh Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rishikesh Tripathi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos.4 to 6 and the learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed praying for quashing of the order 21.10.2022 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Banda in Revision No.021 of 2021 (Rajendra Singh Vs. Chandra Bhushan Singh) under Section 48 of U.P.C.H. Act.

¶7

A perusal of the impugned revisional order shows that it has set aside the order dated 27.06.2012 passed by Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Banda which was passed without any service of notice on the revisionists, Rajendra Singh and others. The Deputy Director of Consolidation, Banda, has set aside the aforesaid order and remanded the matter to the Settlement Officer of Consolidation for deciding the case afresh after affording of opportunity of hearing to the parties on merit.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notice was served on the respondents through registered post and the parties were also heard before passing of the order by the Settlement Officer of Consolidation.

¶9

Learned counsel for the contesting-respondent nos.4 to 6 has disputed the same and has stated that there is no material on record to substantiate the aforesaid argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶10

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this court finds that there is no ground for interference with the impugned order dated 21.10.22 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Banda made out and the same is declined.

¶11

Writ petition is dismissed.

¶12

However, it is directed that the Settlement Officer of Consolidation, Banda will decide the case within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order as per remand order dated 21.10.2022 passed by Deputy Director of Consolidation, Banda.

¶13

Order Date :- 18.11.2022

¶14

¶15

Digitally signed by SURENDAR SINGH NARANG Date: 2022.11.18 16:35:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chandra Bhushan Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Bhushan Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 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

Atwar Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Briksha Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Sangam Lal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 25 Others

Sita Ram Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 3 Others

Smt Pooja Gupta and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Baljeet Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others