Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: east punjab holdings consolidation and prevention of fragmentation act 1948 Year: 2007 Page 1 of about 15 results (0.099 seconds)

Jun 15 2007 (HC)

Rajdhani Park Kalyan Karini Samiti Vs. Financial Commissioner and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jun-15-2007

Reported in : 142(2007)DLT226; 2007(97)DRJ38

..... the financial commissioner dismissing case no. 119/1986, a revision petition under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 ('holdings act'). by the impugned order the financial commissioner affirmed the order dated 7.4.1986 passed by the settlement officer (consolidation) which order has been challenged by the rajdhani park kalyan karini samiti in the first mentioned ..... 7 of the said writ petition which reads as under:that the consolidation proceedings went on for years before the consolidation officer and without applying with the provisions of east punjab holdings and prevention of fragmentation act, the respondent no. 1 has prepared a scheme of the consolidation of holding of village mundka and under the said scheme the land of the ..... no. 6 and whether they formed part of the disputed lands.(vii) finally it was pointed out that the object of the holdings act being prevention of fragmentation, the present petitions if allowed would result in further fragmentation. it was prayed that the writ petitions ought to be thereforee dismissed.19. appearing on behalf of respondent no. 4 trust ..... transferee of the right would be entitled to make a claim before the consolidation officer. the expression 'land owner' not having been defined in the holdings act, recourse has to be taken punjab land revenue act 1887.40. the expression 'land owner' under the punjab land revenue act reads as under:(2) 'land-owner' does not include a tenant or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 02 2007 (HC)

Surjan Singh and ors. Vs. Financial Commissioner and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jul-02-2007

Reported in : 142(2007)DLT123

..... , under article 226 of the constitution of india, the petitioners question orders made by the financial commissioner in consolidation proceedings, in terms of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation ) act, 1948, as extended to delhi (called 'the act') in village mundka, delhi started in 1975. a scheme of consolidation was drawn up inviting applications for residential plots in the extended lal dora within thirty days from 1.4 ..... .76. the scheme was published and was confirmed by the settlement officer (consolidation) on 26.7.1976. in terms of ..... judgment reported as rajinder singh v. financial commissioner, delhi : 122(2005)dlt151 as follows:the act was passed to provide for the consolidation of agricultural holdings and for preventing the fragmentation of agricultural holdings in the state of punjab. it was extended to delhi. chapter iii of the act deals with consolidation of holdings and it is provided by section 14 that the government may either suo motu, or on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 11 2007 (HC)

Beg Ram Vs. Financial Commissioner and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jun-11-2007

Reported in : (2008)149PLR42

..... allowing the revision petitions, being cases nos. 293-294/1984-ca, filed by the gaon sabha dera mandi, respondent no. 2 herein, under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 ('holdings act'). by the impugned order, the financial commissioner set aside the orders dated 11.1.1982 and 20.3.1982 passed by the ..... consolidation officer allotting certain lands in favor of the petitioner.2. the consolidation proceedings in village dera mandi commenced in the year 1974 and concluded on 21.7.1984. according to the petitioner, when the consolidation proceedings ..... proceedings have been vitiated by unlawful consideration).11. the words 'at any time' occurring in section 42 of the holdings act has been held by this court in suraj mal (supra) mean 'any time during the pendency of the consolidation proceedings.' that being the position, the learned counsel for the petitioner is right in contending that the financial commissioner could ..... .7.1984 the final verification took place of the khatauni papers and with that the consolidation scheme stood finalized.4. after the conclusion of the scheme of consolidation, the gaon sabha on 29.9.1984 filed revision petitions under section 42 of the holdings act stating that the land could not have been taken away from the gaon sabha and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 2007 (HC)

Om Parkash and ors. Vs. Financial Commissioner and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-05-2007

Reported in : 2007(95)DRJ289

..... the petitioners.2. the facts leading to the filing of this petition are that on 22.3.1953 a notification was issued under section 14(1) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act 1948 ('act') in respect of the estate of village mundka. the right holders were asked to make the demands for allotment of plots in the extended laldora between april ..... the petitioners herein made demands for allotment of plots in the extended laldora on 14th,15th and 16th april 1976. the petitioners are petty land holders. their total holding before the consolidation operation was a little less than three and a half bighas. in fact, they were joint khatedars with others. shri deep chand, deceased father of petitioners 1 ..... had to surrender out of his own agricultural land. in dealing with such rights of individual right holders it was incumbent upon the settlement officer (consolidation) to scrutinise the applications before him by holding proper enquiry about each of right holder concerned separately and then pass speaking orders relating to every individual case specifying cogent reasons for its acceptance ..... financial commissioner, delhi who by the impugned order dated 21.5.1991 allowed the said revision petition holding that the consolidation officer had misread and misinterpreted the order dated 9.9.1986 of his predecessor. accordingly the order dated 10.9.1990 of the consolidation officer was set aside. 12. shri o.n. vohra, learned senior counsel appearing for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 2007 (HC)

Om Parkash and ors. Vs. Financial Commissioner Delhi and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-05-2007

Reported in : 2007CriLJ1530

..... the petitioners.2. the facts leading to the filing of this petition are that on 22.3.1953 a notification was issued under section 14(1) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act 1948 ('act') in respect of the estate of village mundka. the right holders were asked to make the demands for allotment of plots in the extended laldora between april ..... the petitioners herein made demands for allotment of plots in the extended laldora on 14th,15th and 16th april 1976. the petitioners are petty land holders. their total holding before the consolidation operation was a little less than three and a half bighas. in fact, they were joint khatedars with others. shri deep chand, deceased father of petitioners 1 ..... had to surrender out of his own agricultural land. in dealing with such rights of individual right holders it was incumbent upon the settlement officer (consolidation) to scrutinise the applications before him by holding proper enquiry about each of right holder concerned separately and then pass speaking orders relating to every individual case specifying cogent reasons for its acceptance ..... commissioner, delhi who by the impugned order dated 21.5.1991 allowed the said revision petition holding that the consolidation officer had misread and misinterpreted the order dated 9.9.1986 of his predecessor. accordingly the order dated 10.9.1990 of the consolidation officer was set aside.12. shri o.n. vohra, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 15 2007 (SC)

Chairman, Indore Vikas Pradhikaran Vs. Pure Industrial Cock and Chem. ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-15-2007

Reported in : AIR2007SC2458; 2007(4)MPHT1(SC); 2007(8)SCALE110; (2007)8SCC705; 2007AIRSCW4387; AIR2007SC2458; JT2007(7)SC352;

..... . in that case, it was held by the majority that where the state government had, under section 41(1) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948, delegated its appellate powers vested in it under section 21(4) to an 'officer', an order passed by such an officer was an order passed by the state government itself ..... and 'not an order passed by any officer under this act' within section 42 and was not revisable by the state government. it was pointed out that for the purpose ..... become otiose.(vii) the authority constituted under section 38 being statutorily obligated to implement the development plan, as would appear from sections 38(2) and 49 of the act, the power/duty to prevent haphazard by declaring the town development scheme must be held to be vested in the appellant-authority.(viii) the state of madhya pradesh having framed rules known as ..... every public purpose does not fall under article 300a nor every exercise of eminent domain an acquisition or taking possession under article 300a. generally speaking preservation of public health or prevention of damage to life and property are considered to be public purposes. yet deprivation of property for any such purpose would not amount to acquisition or possession taken under article .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 16 2007 (HC)

Chanan Singh Vs. Addl. Director, Consolidation of Holdings Punjab and ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-16-2007

Reported in : (2007)4PLR28a

..... challenge exparte order passed by respondent no. 1 as well as order annexure p-3 vide which he has refused to entertain petition under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (for short the act) for setting aside exparte order passed against the petitioner.2. it was prayed by the petitioner that an application was made by respondent nos. 2 to 6 ..... under section 42 of the act in which only tehsildar sales (surplus), hoshiarpur was impleaded as a party. the prayer made in the application was that surplus land situated at ..... another place be substituted with another surplus land. said application was allowed on the consent given by naib tehsildar agrarian. in pursuance to the order passed by the additional director, consolidation of holdings, punjab, on an .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 20 2007 (HC)

Sem Pal Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-20-2007

Reported in : (2007)147PLR588

..... for the common purposes. these facts along with other disputed questions can be raised and better decided by the competent authority under the punjab village common lands (regulation) act or under the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948.4. in view of the facts mentioned above, we dispose of this writ petition with liberty to the petitioners to file application before ..... quashed. further prayer is for redistributing the bachat land, which is lying unutilised, amongst the co-sharers from whom it was taken after imposing a cut during consolidation proceedings.2. at the time of arguments it was brought to our notice that for the requisite relief the petitioners had earlier filed an application under section 11 ..... of the punjab village common lands (regulation) act, 1961. however, the same was got dismissed as withdrawn. their counsel states that the petitioners, because of the illiteracy, could not understand the intricacies ..... of law and the said application was dismissed as withdrawn under some mis-impression.3. we feel that in the present case disputed questions of fact are involved. it is yet to be ascertained whether consolidation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 2007 (HC)

Amar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-16-2007

Reported in : (2008)152PLR12

..... village according to revenue records.(6) lands reserved for the common purposes of a village under section 18 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (east punjab act, 50 of 1948), the management and control whereof vests in the gram panchayat under section 23-a of the aforesaid act.explanation: lands entered in the column of ownership of record of rights as 'jumla malkan wa digar haqdaran arazi ..... grounds, schools, drinking wells, or ponds situated within the sabha area as defined in clause (mmm) of section 3 of the punjab gram panchayat act, 1952 excluding lands reserved for the common purposes of a village under section 18 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (east punjab act 50 of 1948), the management and control whereof vests in the state government under section 23-a of the aforesaid ..... submitted that the land in question which belongs to the proprietors and right holders of the village and was reserved during consolidation proceedings in village dhakwala, tehsil and district karnal under sections 18 and 23-a of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 ('1948 act' - for short), only the management and control was given to the gram panchayat. however, the same has been made to vest .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 02 2007 (HC)

Naseem Banoo, Vs. Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal,

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-02-2007

Reported in : AIR2007All116; 2007(2)AWC1350

..... appealable. learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the judgement of the apex court in roop chandra v. state of punjab and anr. (supra). the apex court in the said judgement had considered the provisions of section 21(4) and section 42 of east punjab holdings ( consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948. section 21 (4) provided that any person aggrieved by the order of the settlement officer ..... (consolidation) may within sixty days of that order appeal to the state government. section 41 of the act provided that the state government for administration of the act appoint such person as it think fit and may ..... by notification delegate any power or function under this act to .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //