High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 11 AHC CK 0372

Smt. Hashmat Ara vs Addl. Commissioner Admn. Devi Patan Division Gonda and Others

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 4 November 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ritu Raj Awasthi, J
CASE NUMBER
Misc. Single No. 6502 of 2011

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 378 words

Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.—Notice on behalf of opposite parties No. 1 to 5 has been accepted by the learned Chief Standing Counsel whereas Mr. R.N. Gupta has accepted notice for opposite party No. 6.

2.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

3.

The writ petition is directed against the order dated 28.11.2006 passed by Additional Collector, Balrampur in Case No. 2/67/64/80 u/s 166/167 of the U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as well as the order dated 3.11.2009 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Admin), Devi Patan Division, Gonda in Revision No. 319/284 Smt. Hashmat Ara v. State of U.P. and Ors. u/s 333 of the Act.

4.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the opposite parties may be directed to allow validattion of transfer of land in question in favour of the Petitioner under the provisions of Section 2 of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms (Special Provision) Act, 2010 and the Government Order dated 30.6.2010.

5.

His further submission is that the controversy involved in the writ petition has been considered by the Court in W.P. No. 43018 of 2005 Krishn Kant and Ors. v. State of U.P. through Upper Commissioner and Ors. and by judgment and order dated 19.7.2011 the writ petition has been disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to avail the remedy as provided u/s 2 of the U.P. Z.A. and L.R. Special Provision Act, 2010, a copy of the aforesaid judgment is annexed as Annexure-10 to the writ petition.

6.

Learned Standing Counsel does not dispute the aforesaid legal position.

7.

In this view of the matter, there is no need to adjudicate the matter again on merit.

8.

With the consent of parties'' counsel, the writ petition is disposed of finally in terms of the judgment and order dated 19.7.2011 passed in W.P. No. 43018 of 2005 Krishn Kant and Ors. v. State of U.P. through Upper Commissioner and Ors. The Petitioner shall be entitled to get the benefit of the said judgment.

The office is directed to issue certified copy of the order dated 19.7.2011 passed W.P. No. 43018 of 2005 Krishn Kant and Ors. v. State of U.P. through Upper Commissioner and Ors. while issuing the certified copy of this order.