Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.

SWAMI VIVEKANAND SUBHARTI UNIVERSITY,

MEERUT, U.P.

SUBJECT: Land Laws including Tenure and Tenancy System

Case Memorial – Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.P

SUBMITTED TO:

Assistant Professor: - Prof. AK Aggrawal

SUBMITTED BY:

Vijay Teotia

B.A. LL.B IX SEMESTER

0

SARDAR PATEL SUBHARTI INSTITUTE OF LAW

Memorial on behalf of Petitioner Page 1

 Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.P

BEFORE THE HONORABLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD

In the Matter of

Udai Bhan Singh And Ors.

Vs

The Board Of Revenue, U.P

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Memorial on behalf of Petitioner Page 2

 Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.P

 LIST OF ABBREVIATION …………………………………………………………………4

 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES …………………………………………………………………5
List of Books
List of Statues
List of Cases
List of Internet Sources

 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ……………………………………………………….6

 STATEMENT OF FACTS …………………………………………………………………7
 ISSUES ……………… …………………………………………………………….………8
 ARGUMENTS ………………………………………………………………………..….9-12

PRAYER 13

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Memorial on behalf of Petitioner Page 3

 Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.P

A.I.R - All India Reporters

Art. - Article

HC - High Court

Hon’ble - Honorable

Ors. - Others

SC - Supreme Court

SCC - Supreme Court Cases

SEC. - Section

WP - Writ Petition

U/S - Under Section

VOL. - Volume

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Memorial on behalf of Petitioner Page 4

 Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.P

BOOKS REFERRED:-

 By R.R. MAURYA, UTTAR PRADESH LAND LAWS, 1st Edition. Central Law
Publication.

STATUTE REFERRED

 Constitution of India, 1950.

 U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950

JOURNALS REFFERED:

 Allahabad Criminal Cases

Memorial on behalf of Petitioner Page 5

 Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.P

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

THE RESPONDENT HAS RESPONDED TO THE PETITION UNDER ARTCLE 2261 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, TO THE HONORABLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT.

1
Article 226. Power of High Courts to issue certain writs ;-

(1) Notwithstanding anything in Article 32 every High Court shall have powers, throughout the territories in relation
to which it exercise jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government,
within those territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus,
prohibitions, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part
III and for any other purpose

(2) The power conferred by clause ( 1 ) to issue directions, orders or writs to any Government, authority or person
may also be exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause
of action, wholly or in part, arises for the exercise of such power, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government
or authority or the residence of such person is not within those territories

(3) Where any party against whom an interim order, whether by way of injunction or stay or in any other manner, is
made on, or in any proceedings relating to, a petition under clause ( 1 ), without

(a) furnishing to such party copies of such petition and all documents in support of the plea for such interim order;
and

(b) giving such party an opportunity of being heard, makes an application to the High Court for the vacation of such
order and furnishes a copy of such application to the party in whose favour such order has been made or the counsel
of such party, the High Court shall dispose of the application within a period of two weeks from the date on which it
is received or from the date on which the copy of such application is so furnished, whichever is later, or where the
High Court is closed on the last day of that period, before the expiry of the next day afterwards on which the High
Court is open; and if the application is not so disposed of, the interim order shall, on the expiry of that period, or, as
the case may be, the expiry of the aid next day, stand vacated

(4) The power conferred on a High Court by this article shall not be in derogation of the power conferred on the
Supreme court by clause ( 2 ) of Article 32

Memorial on behalf of Petitioner Page 6

 Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.P

FACTS OF THE CASE

1. That a Bench Consisting of Satish Chandra and N. D. Ojha, JJ., has referred to this Full

Bench the following question for its answer:

1.1. What is the impact of Section 5 (2) (a) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act,

1953 on writ petitions or special appeals arising out of them in which judgment or

orders passed in suits or proceedings relating to declaration of rights in land covered

by a notification under Section 4 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act are

impugned?"

2. That there was a divergence of opinion between the two learned Judges on the

above question. While Satish Chandra, J., took the view that the suit or proceeding

giving rise to a writ petition is pending in this court and abates by virtue of Section 5

(2) (a) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act hereinafter referred to as the Act --

on a notification under Section 4 thereof being Issued, N. D. Ojha, J., was of a

contrary opinion

STATEMENT OF ISSUES
Memorial on behalf of Petitioner Page 7
 Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.P

1. WHETHER THE IMPACT OF SECTION 5 (2) (A) OF THE U. P. CONSOLIDATION

OF HOLDINGS ACT, 1953 ON WRIT PETITIONS ARISING OUT OF THEM IN

WHICH JUDGMENT OR ORDERS PASSED IN SUITS OR PROCEEDINGS

RELATING TO DECLARATION OF RIGHTS IN LAND COVERED BY A

NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS

ACT ARE IMPUGNED?

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

Memorial on behalf of Petitioner Page 8

 Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.P

1. WHETHER THE IMPACT OF SECTION 5 (2) (A) OF THE U. P. CONSOLIDATION

OF HOLDINGS ACT, 1953 ON WRIT PETITIONS ARISING OUT OF THEM IN

WHICH JUDGMENT OR ORDERS PASSED IN SUITS OR PROCEEDINGS

RELATING TO DECLARATION OF RIGHTS IN LAND COVERED BY A

NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS

ACT ARE IMPUGNED?

The counsel humbly submits that An analysis of the language employed in Section 5 (2) (a) of

the Act consequently leaves no room for doubt that it has no impact on a writ petition filed

challenging orders passed in suits or proceedings provided for by that provision.

When a writ petition is filed challenging a decision in a suit or proceeding declaring or

adjudicating rights or interest in any land, this Court calls for the record of the suit or

proceeding and if it is found to be without jurisdiction or if there is an error of law apparent

on the face of the record, the judgment or order is quashed. This Court after quashing the

order cannot substitute its own order or decree for the order or decree impugned but must

send back to the court or authority concerned for deciding the case in accordance with law

declared by it. 

ADVANCE ARGUMENT

Memorial on behalf of Petitioner Page 9

 Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.P

1. WHETHER THE IMPACT OF SECTION 5 (2) (A) OF THE U. P. CONSOLIDATION

OF HOLDINGS ACT, 1953 ON WRIT PETITIONS ARISING OUT OF THEM IN

WHICH JUDGMENT OR ORDERS PASSED IN SUITS OR PROCEEDINGS

RELATING TO DECLARATION OF RIGHTS IN LAND COVERED BY A

NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS

ACT ARE IMPUGNED?

The counsel humbly submits that An analysis of the language employed in Section 5 (2) (a) of

the Act consequently leaves no room for doubt that it has no impact on a writ petition filed

challenging orders passed in suits or proceedings provided for by that provision.

Before embarking on a consideration of the impact of Section 5 (2) (a) of the Act, it is

necessary to appreciate the true nature and character of proceedings under Article 226 of

the Constitution and special appeals against orders passed in such proceedings.

PRAYER

Therefore, it may be please this Hon`ble “International Court of Justice” that in the lights of
Facts Presented, Issues Raised, Arguments, and Authorities Citied, the Counsel for Respondent
humbly prays before this Hon`ble Court, to kindly adjudge that: -

1. The permission of assistant collector for the transfer made under section 157aa, by a

lease holder who belongs to scheduled caste in favor of a person who also belongs to

scheduled caste, should be required.

Memorial on behalf of Petitioner Page 10

 Udai Bhan Singh And Ors. vs The Board Of Revenue, U.P

2. The writ petition, filed under article 226 of the constitution of India should be,

dismissed.

Pass any order in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience.

………………………..

Counsel on the behalf of Petitioner

Vijay Teotia

B.A.LL.B. IX semester

Memorial on behalf of Petitioner Page 11