Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Abdul Rashid vs State Of U.P. Thru. Dept. Of Urban ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|11 November, 2014

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
It is the case of the petitioner that notice under Section 10(5) of the Act has not been issued. The petitioner has neither given voluntary possession nor the possession has been taken by the respondents under Section 10(6) of the Act. In para-8 of the counter affidavit it is stated that there is no record regarding service of notice issued under Section 10(5) of the Act, available on record of the proceedings. It is further stated that the copy of the said notice was also sent to the Collector for taking over the possession of the land from the returnee and it appears that on receipt of the copy of the said notice, the Revenue Authorities incorporated the name of the State in the revenue record as is evident from the extract of Khasra of 1414 Fasli. There is no averment in the counter affidavit that the possession has been given voluntary after the order passed under Section 10(3) of the Act or after the issue of alleged notice under Section 10(5) of the Act, or forceful possession has been taken under Section 10(6) of the Act.
The matter relates to Allahabad. Let the learned Standing Counsel produce the record of the case day after tomorrow.
Put up day after tomorrow.
Order Date :- 11.11.2014 OP
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Abdul Rashid vs State Of U.P. Thru. Dept. Of Urban ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
11 November, 2014
Judges
  • Rajes Kumar
  • Shashi Kant