Allowed

Ram Chandra and Anothers v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC3 Mar 2022WRIC/2827/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court permitted the petitioners to raise a dispute regarding the measurement of allotted land under Section 24 of the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006, directing the authority to decide the complaint within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to permit petitioners to raise dispute under Section 24 of U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006, with decision by authority within three months.

Ram Chandra and Anothers Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 18

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2827 of 2022 Petitioner :- Ram Chandra And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shriprakash Shrivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 4.

¶5

The petitioners have preferred the present petition inter-alia with the prayer to direct the respondent nos. 2 to 4 to demarcate the land allotted to the petitioner and delivered the possession of the aforesaid land situated at Arazi No. 624M area 3930 Hect. situated at Mauza Chakhani Dukhi Mishr, Tappa Haveli, Pargana-CJo., Tehsil Tamkuhiraj, District Kushi Nagar within stipulated time.

¶6

It is argued that in this regard a representation has already been made by the petitioners before the Collector, District Kushi Nagar as per the provision contained under Section 27 of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act & Rules, 1960.

¶7

After some arguments, a preliminary objection has been raised by the learned Standing Counsel that in the representation made by the petitioner before the Collector, a prayer has been made for measurement of the land. It is argued that a complete procedure in this regard has been prescribed under Section 24 of the U.P. Land Revenue Code, 2006.

¶8

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶9

With the consent of counsel for the parties, the present petition is disposed of finally permitting the petitioners to raise his dispute, if so advised as per Section 24 of the Act of 2006. If such complaint/application is filed by the petitioners before the concerned competent authority within a period of three weeks from today, the authority concerned is directed to decide the same strictly in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months after providing an opportunity to all the parties concerned unless there is no legal impediment.

¶10

Order Date :- 3.3.2022

¶11

Swati

¶12

Digitally signed by SWATI PATHAK Date: 2022.03.05 11:32:15 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Chandra and Anothers v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Chandra and Anothers v. State of U.P. and 6 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

Matsya Jivi Sahkari Samiti Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Chhedi Lal Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Raj Kumari Vs State of U P and 19 Others

Arjun Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Subash Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dinesh Kumar Vs the Commissioner Bareilly Division and 4 Others