Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.25 seconds)

Mahendra And 13 Others vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 30 May, 2019

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel and after having gone through the affidavit filed alongwith the impleadment application, I am the view that the order dated 26.5.2018 by which the pattas of the petitioners and of the other lessees were cancelled could not have been so cancelled. First of all, the proceedings which were initiated were absolutely barred by limitation as has been held in Writ - C No. - 22369 of 2009 (Saroj Devi vs. State of U.P. And Others) decided on 19.4.2019. The period of limitation for filing an application for cancellation of pattas was only three years. Further as, it was pointed out by the State Government and its officials, under Section 198 A (1) of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act actual physical possession had to be given to the lessees to whom the pattas were granted and as and when they were ousted from possession they had to be given back their possession. It is the duty of the Sub Divisional Officer to inspect the land which comes under his Division and to see that everything is being fairly done in it. It is also the duty of the Sub Divisional Officer to see that such land over which pattas are granted for agricultural purposes, agricultural work is done and if he finds that the allottee has been ousted from possession then it is also his pious duty to see that the lessee is put back in possession. From the various provisions of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950, as also from the various provisions of the Land Record Manual, I also find that it is the duty of the Lekhpal, Tehsildar and Sub Divisional Officer to inspect as to who is in possession and tilling the land. This exercise, of seeing who is in possession has to be carried out thrice every year. They also have to see as to who is entered in the khatauni. Further more, if they find that if any illegal occupation is there, either over the Gaon Sabha land or, over the land which has been given out in patta then it becomes their bounden duty to see that the land is freed from encroachments.
Allahabad High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - S Varma - Full Document

State Of U.P. Thru Secy. P.W.D. And 4 Ors. vs Smt. Shabbo on 18 October, 2024

3. The appeal is directed against the order dated 15.12.2005 passed by learned Single Judge, whereby a direction was given to the appellants to reconsider the case of respondent for providing her employment under theU.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants (Dying in Harness) Rules, 1974 ('the Rules of 1974') ignoring the Government Order dated 29.01.2003 relying on Saroj Devi Vs. State of U.P. and others : (1999) 2 UPLBEC 1404 and other judgments.
Allahabad High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1