Partly allowed

Ram Khelavan v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Barabanki and Others

Allahabad HC1 Oct 2024/987/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed orders allowing a belated appeal and condoning delay under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act without providing notice or recording satisfaction regarding service of notice to the petitioner. The matter was remanded for a fresh hearing.

What did the court decide?

Orders dated 07.02.2022 and 23.08.2024 quashed. Matter remanded to Settlement Officer to decide appeal afresh after giving a proper opportunity of hearing.

Ram Khelavan Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation… — Land Acquisition | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:68144

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- WRIT - B No. - 987 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Ram Khelavan

¶5

Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation, Barabanki And Others

¶6

Counsel for Petitioner :- Sharad Pathak,Sameer Kumar Upadhyay,Saurabh Pathak

¶7

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Adarsh Kumar Maurya,Mohan Singh,Rupali Srivastava

¶8

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶9

Heard Sri Sharad Pathak, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Dr. Krishna Singh, the learned Standing Counsel, Sri Mohan Singh, the learned counsel for the Gram Sabha, Ibrahimabad, Pargana Satrik, Tehsil Nawabganj, District Barabanki and Sri Adarsh Kumar Maurya, the learned Standing Counsel for the opposite parties no.6 to 11.

¶10

By means of the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged validity of an order dated 07.02.2022 passed by the Settlement OfÏcer, Consolidation, Barabanki in Appeal No.139 of 2022, under Section 21(2) U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, District Barabanki, whereby an appeal filed by the opposite parties no.6 to 11 along with an application for condonation of delay, has been allowed simultaneous with allowing application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The petitioner had filed Revision No.1415 of 2022, under Section 48(1) of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 against the aforesaid order

¶11

dated 07.02.2022, which revision has been dismissed by means of a judgement and order dated 23.08.2024 passed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation, Barabanki and the petitioner has challenged validity of the revisional order also. Meanwhile, the Consolidation OfÏcer has passed an order for taking possession and has issued a warrant of possession under Rule 109 of Consolidation of Holdings Rules and the petitioner has challenged that order also.

¶12

Submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the opposite parties no.6 to 11 had Appeal No.139 of 2022 belatedly and the application for condonation of delay as well as appeal itself has been allowed by means of an order dated 07.02.2022, without any notice to the petitioner.

¶13

The revisional court has dismissed the revision without adverting to this aspect of the matter that neither delay could have been condoned without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner nor to the appeal could have been allowed in this manner.

¶14

The learned counsel for the opposite parties could not dispute the fact that the application for condonation of delay and the appeal has been allowed without recording any satisfaction regarding service of notice on the petitioner.

¶15

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed . The order dated 07.02.2022 passed by the Settlement

¶16

OfÏcer, Consolidation, Barabanki in Appeal No.139 of 2022, under Section 21(2) U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, District Barabanki and a judgement and order dated 23.08.2024 passed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation, Barabanki are quashed . The matter is remanded to the Settlement OfÏcer, Consolidation, District – Barabanki for deciding Appeal No.139 of 2022 afresh after giving a proper opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties. The Settlement OfÏcer, Consolidation shall proceed to decide the appeal expeditiously without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties. The parties shall appear before the Settlement Consolidation on 22.10.2024.

¶17

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

¶18

Order Date :- 1.10.2024 KR

¶19

Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Khelavan v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Barabanki and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Khelavan v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Barabanki 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

X Rape Victim, Crime No 007 of 2022, Thru. Her Father/ Informant Vs Nisha Anand, Distt. Steering Committe Thru. Its Chairman / D.M., Amethi

Parminder Singh Ranhotra and Another Vs Shri Suryapal Gangwar, District Magistrate / Collector Lko.

State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Medical Health and Family Welfare Lko and Another Vs Emergency Dhatri Sishu Care Foundation Thru. Auth. Repr. Toopilivenkatasravan Kumar Reddy and Anr.

Abdul Kadir Alias Kadir Vs Civil Judge (Junior Division) District Gonda and 8 Others

Shiv Nath and 2 Others Vs Dy. Director of Consolidation, Ayodhya and Another

Anil Kumar Singh Vs U.P. State Public Services Tribunal,Indira Bhawan,Lko. and 4 Others