Petitioner sought certiorari and mandamus regarding an order rejecting his residential patta claim. Court held factual findings by District Magistrate are not ordinarily examinable under Article 226 as common law remedies exist for agravance.
Petitioner not inclined to interfere; relief denied as common law remedy available for aggrieved parties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:235222-DB
Court No. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 37767 of 2023 Petitioner :- Dharam Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sheetla Prasad,Dharmendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Sunil Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
"A. Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari caking the records of the case and quash the order dated 18.9.2023 passed by District Magistrate, Bulandshahr (Annexure No.13 to the writ petition) and the respondent may be further restrain to not interfere in peaceful possession of the petition at any manner.
B. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus as a detail enquiry report may be called for by constituting high level committee about the manipulation of public record relating to patta dated 30.09.1989 granted to the petitioner and others and the said report may be submitted before this Hon'ble Court for appropriate order or direction for the ends and interest of justice."
the order impugned has been passed strictly in accordance with law and there is no infirmity in it. He has submitted that once the District Magistrate after considering the entire facts and circumstances as well as after appreciating the evidence on record has taken a prudent decision that the documents are fictitious in nature, the said finding of fact cannot ordinarily be adjudicating under Art.226 of the Constitution of India. If the petitioner is not satisfied with the order impugned, he may invoke the common law remedy as available in law.
Order Date :- 12.12.2023 Manish Himwan
Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to interfere with the District Magistrate's order rejecting the petitioner's land claim due to forged documents without infringing on judicial discretion.
Whether the factual finding by the District Magistrate regarding documents being fictitious is amenable to scrutiny under Article 226.
Dharam Singh
State Of U.P.
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Prashant Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
