Disposed

Smt. Ram Dulari v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC23 May 2024/4466/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging orders under the Land Revenue Act was dismissed. The court held that such disputes regarding land tenure adjudication rest exclusively with the Dy. Director of Consolidation under the Consolidation of Holdings Act, regulating the Sub-Divisional Magistrate's jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to petitioner to raise grievances before the Dy. Director of Consolidation.

Smt. Ram Dulari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:39268

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4466 of 2024 Petitioner :- Smt. Ram Dulari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Raj Kumar Yadava, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for respondent No. 5.

¶6

By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 21.11.2022 passed by SubDivisional Magistrate, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow and also order dated 19.04.2024 passed in revision by the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Lucknow Division, Lucknow.

¶7

The proceedings in the present case has been initiated in proceedings under Section 33/39 of Land Revenue Act in respect of plot No. 1438 area 1.233 hect. situated in Village - Gahru, Tehsil - Sarojani Nagar, Lucknow. It has been submitted that the said land was initially registered in the name of one Kalika and the entry in his name continued for a very long time. After the death of Kalika, name of Mohan Lal was recorded in his place. The Mohan Lal was unmarried and had executed a will in favour of petitioner on 20.02.2019. In fasli years 13561359, the name of tenure holder was recorded in the revenue records but subsequently the said entries were duly corrected in the name of petitioner was entered as Sirdar.

¶8

The matter was decided by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow but on the interference of this Court, the matter was remitted back to him for fresh decision. It is in the remand proceedings that the impugned order dated 21.11.2022 has been passed after recording a finding that the orders impugned have been passed by Consolidation Officer during consolidation proceedings and such orders can be interfered only by the Dy. Director of Consolidation and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate under Section 33/39 of the Land Revenue Act would not have any jurisdiction to set aside such orders which were passed during consolidation proceedings. Being aggrieved by the order dated 21.11.2022 the petitioner

¶9

had filed a revision before the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Lucknow.

¶10

The revisional authority has also upheld the order of the SubDivisional Magistrate dated 21.11.2022 holding that the mater deserves to be set aside by the Dy. Director of Consolidation who can do the same after receiving requisite information and status report about the said land.

¶11

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for petitioner does not dispute the fact that adjudication in the present case can only be done by the Dy. Director of Consolidation under Section 48 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act.

¶12

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to raise his grievances before the Dy. Director of Consolidation who shall decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law after considering all the facts and hearing all the concerned parties.

¶13

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 23.5.2024

¶15

Ravi/

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Ram Dulari v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Ram Dulari v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue, Lucknow and 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ravindra Kumar Srivastava Vs Ayush Kumar and 6 Others

Bhanwareshwar Verma Vs Phoenix Arc Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Mahesh Malunjkar

Shri Prakash Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Fakira Vs Deputy Driector of Consolidation Sitapur and Others

Ganesh Shankar Mishra Vs Virendra Chaturvedi and Another

Banwari Lal Sharda Prasad Vaishya and Another Vs Civil Judge (J.D.)Kunda, Pratapgarh and 8 Others