Disposed

Udal Singh Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2023WRIC/8788/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging an appellate order remanding revenue proceedings, the Court declined interference. It directed the Tehsildar to conclude the proceedings within six months in strict compliance with the appellate order and established legal principles ensuring a fair hearing.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed; Tehsildar directed to conclude proceedings within six months in strict compliance with the appellate order.

Udal Singh Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8788 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Udal Singh Yadav And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- P.K. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Avinash Chandra Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Ajay Kumar Singh Kushwaha, learned counsel holding brief of Shri P.K. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Ms. Vibha Srivastava, learned counsel holding brief of Shri Avinash Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel representing the Gaon Sabha.

¶6

The proceedings under section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 were decided in favour of the petitioners by the order dated 20.11.2021, against which the State filed an appeal under section 67 (5) of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, which has been partly allowed by the order impugned dated 27.06.2022.

¶7

The appellate court has, while setting aside the order dated 20.11.2021, remanded the matter to the court of Tehsildar with a direction that the spot inspection and other enquiries be made on the spot in the presence of all the parties as well as the witnesses and, thereafter, spot memo should be prepared and, thereafter, after providing full opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, speaking and reasoned order be passed.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the order of remand is not according to law as during the course of Spot inspection etc., there was due representation of the Stateauthorities.

¶9

Ms. Vibha Srivastava, learned counsel has placed the instructions before this Court, however, the instructions reveal that they are with regard to the violation of some injunction order passed in Original Suit No. 21 of 2016, in which the petitioners are defendants.

¶10

Be that as it may, since the order impugned is merely an order of remand and operative portion indicates that the appellate court, in fact, is inclined to ensure strict compliance of the Rules 66 and 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016, which should be followed

¶11

in such proceedings as held by this Court in the case of Rishipal Singh vs. State of U.P. reported in 2023 (1) AWC 4 , no interference is required in the order impugned as the parties shall have full opportunity to make their submissions before the Tehsildar and after due inspection etc., as already directed under the order impugned.

¶12

In view of above, while declining to interfere in the order impugned, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Tehsildar concerned to conclude the proceedings pursuant to the order of remand strictly, in consonance with the directions contained in the operative portion of the appellate order as well as law laid down in the case of Rishi Pal Singh (supra), within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.

¶13

Order Date :- 5.4.2023 Sazia

¶14

Digitally signed by :- SAZIA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Udal Singh Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Udal Singh Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Samim Bano Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Kalimum Nisha Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others

Jhuri Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shyam Lal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohd. Aslam Jamal Khan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others