Sukhbir Narain (Dead) by Lrs. Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal Nos. 1375-76 of 1973
Petitioner: Sukhbir Narain (Dead) by Lrs.
Respondent: Deputy Director of Consolidation.
Apeal: Civil Appeal Nos. 1375-76 of 1973
Judges: M.P. THAKKAR & B.C. RAY, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Feb 19, 1987
Head Note:
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE:
Rejection of claim of appellants for correction of entries -Writ petition to High Court challenging revisional orders passed by Dy. Director, Consolidation -Unless there was any error apparent on the face of the order, High Court cannot interfere under Art. 227 – Appellants to pursue such remedy as may be open to them in accordance with law.
JUDGEMENT:
JUDGMENT
1. We have not been shown any good reason to interfere with the orders passed by the High Court dismissing the Writ Petitions instituted by the appellants in order to challenge the revisional orders passed by the Deputy Director, Chakbandi, Uttar Pradesh, Consolidation on January 9, 1970. The Deputy Director has concurred with the view taken by both the lower authorities and has rejected the claim of the appellants for correction of the entries in order to include their names. The High Court could not have interfered with this order under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India unless there was any error apparent on the face of the order. It has not been shown that the impugned orders manifest any such error which would warrant the exercise of the powers of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. We do not propose to go into details as having taking into account all the relevant circumstances we are of the opinion that High Court was justified in dismissing the Writ Petitions in limine. If the appellants have any right in respect of these lands, it is open to them to pursue such remedy as may be open to them in accordance with law, There will be no order as to costs.
Appeal dismissed.
1. We have not been shown any good reason to interfere with the orders passed by the High Court dismissing the Writ Petitions instituted by the appellants in order to challenge the revisional orders passed by the Deputy Director, Chakbandi, Uttar Pradesh, Consolidation on January 9, 1970. The Deputy Director has concurred with the view taken by both the lower authorities and has rejected the claim of the appellants for correction of the entries in order to include their names. The High Court could not have interfered with this order under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India unless there was any error apparent on the face of the order. It has not been shown that the impugned orders manifest any such error which would warrant the exercise of the powers of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. We do not propose to go into details as having taking into account all the relevant circumstances we are of the opinion that High Court was justified in dismissing the Writ Petitions in limine. If the appellants have any right in respect of these lands, it is open to them to pursue such remedy as may be open to them in accordance with law, There will be no order as to costs.
Appeal dismissed.
