Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Allahabad High Court

Smt. Lakhi Devi vs S.D.O. Kasaya District Kushi Nagar And ... on 6 February, 2020

Author: Salil Kumar Rai

Bench: Salil Kumar Rai





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 50
 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 748 of 2013
 
Petitioner :- Smt. Lakhi Devi
 
Respondent :- S.D.O. Kasaya District Kushi Nagar And Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Chandra Verma,Indra Mohan Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,R.C. Singh,Rakesh Kumar Yadav,S.P.K. Tripathi
 

 
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
 

Heard the counsel for the petitioner.

The present writ petition has been filed against the orders dated 19.12.2012 and 12.10.2011 passed in proceedings under the U.P. Panchayat Raj (Maintenance of Family Registers) Rules 1970 (hereinafter referred to as Rules, 1970) Through the order dated 12.10.2011, the Additional Development Officer, District Kushinagar had recorded the name of respondent no. 4 Km.Baby in the family register relating to Tarkeshwar reflecting that respondent no. 4 was the daughter of the deceased Tarkeshwar. The petitioner who is admittedly the sister of Tarkeshwar denies that respondent no. 4 is the daughter of Tarkeshwar and pleads that respondent no. 4 is the daughter of the widow of Tarkeshwar born after the widow re-married one Trilokhi.

Consequently aggrieved by the order dated 12.10.2011 passed by the Additional Development Officer, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 6-A of the aforesaid rules before the Deputy District Magistrate,Kushinagar which has been dismissed by the appellate authority vide its order dated 19.12.2012.

The order passed under the Rules, 1970 are summary in nature and are not binding in any proceedings where the relationship between the parties and their status, including paternity, are to be adjudicated.

In view of the aforesaid, the findings recorded in the orders dated 19.12.2012 and 12.10.2011 would also not be binding in any regular proceedings where the relationship and status of the parties have to be adjudicated.

In view of the aforesaid, it is not a fit case for interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The writ petition is dismissed.

Order Date :- 6.2.2020 IB