Judicial Review Not Negated In Election Matters Where Level Playing Field Is Impaired By Violence: Supreme Court FIR Registration | Prospective Accused Has Locus Standi To Appeal Against Single Judge's Direction: Supreme Court Executing Deed Claiming Disputed Property Not 'False Document' Without Impersonation; Civil Disputes Can't Be Criminalised: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Partition Suit Can Be Transferred To High Court To Avoid Inconsistent Findings With Pending Testamentary Proceedings: Bombay High Court Upgraded Junior High Schools Lose Separate Legal Identity; Recruitment Under 1978 Rules Not Maintainable For Resulting Vacancies: Allahabad High Court Section 370 IPC | Consent Of Victim Is Irrelevant For Proving Trafficking; High Court Sustains Conviction Despite Acquittal Under Section 370A(2) Section 307 IPC | Absence Of Bodily Injury Does Not Exclude Offence If Intention Or Knowledge Is Established From Surrounding Circumstances: Delhi High Court Income Tax Reopening | Assessing Officer Cannot Initiate Reassessment Based On Third-Party Allegations Without Establishing Direct Nexus With Assessee: Gujarat High Court Section 294 CrPC | Non-Examination Of Autopsy Doctor Not Fatal To Prosecution When Post-Mortem Report's Genuineness Is Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Section 25 Arms Act | Mere Custody Without Awareness Not An Offence, 'Conscious Possession' Essential: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Over Single Live Cartridge Section 20 Prevention Of Corruption Act | Statutory Presumption Cannot Be Triggered Without Proof Of Demand; Mere Recovery Insufficient: Himachal Pradesh High Court Article 227 Constitution of India | High Court Cannot Sit In Appeal Over Findings Of Tribunal Under Supervisory Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Mere Registration Of Will Does Not Dispense With Requirement To Prove Execution Under Section 68 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Insurance Policy Exclusion | Onus To Prove Suicide Can Be Discharged By Circumstantial Evidence And Unexplained Discrepancies In Medical Records: NCDRC Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 100 Patents Act | Government Empowered To Authorise Manufacture Of Patented Life-Saving Drugs For Non-Commercial Distribution To Patients: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Centre Over Botched Prisoner Repatriation Contempt Of Court | Bona Fide Efforts To Verify Credentials Preclude Finding Of 'Wilful Disobedience': Telangana High Court Financial Commissioner Cannot Remand Appointment Of Lambardar Without Finding Perversity In Collector’s Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Article 226 | High Court Cannot Act As Second Appellate Authority Over Transfer Orders; Judicial Review Permissible Only On Four Limited Grounds: Rajasthan High Court Drugs and Cosmetics Act | Prosecution Must Prove Possession And Lack Of Licence Through Independent Evidence; Failure Of Panch Witnesses Is Fatal: Telangana High Court Section 392 IPC | Appellate Courts Can Reduce Sentence To Period Already Undergone Considering Protracted Litigation And Lack Of Criminal Antecedents: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Land Allotment Case: Supreme Court Rules Reliance on Notings in Government File Insufficient for Claiming Rights

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court shed light on the reliance placed on notings in government files without the communication of any order. The bench comprising of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abhay S. Oka and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal emphasized that such notings alone cannot be considered a basis for claiming any right or entitlement. The ruling came in the case of a disputed land allotment, wherein the respondents sought relief based on official notings without any formal order passed by the government and conveyed to them.

Highlighting the legal position, the court stated, "Mere notings in the file do not amount to an order unless an order is communicated to a party, thus, no right accrues." The judgment cited previous cases to reinforce this principle, including Mahadeo and others v. Sovan Devi and others (2022) and Municipal Committee v. Jai Narayan & Co. (2022). The court stressed that inter-departmental communications are part of the decision-making process and cannot be relied upon as a basis for claiming rights.

Additionally, the bench addressed the issue of delay in availing appropriate remedies and the doctrine of constructive res judicata. It noted a significant delay on the part of the respondents in challenging the final publication of record of rights. The court held that the respondents' failure to challenge the record earlier waived their right to relief. It also highlighted the importance of disclosing complete and accurate facts before the court, emphasizing that concealing material facts or mis-stating them can result in non-suiting a litigant.

The judgment concluded by dismissing the respondents' writ petition and setting aside the order passed by the High Court. The court further mentioned that there shall be no order as to costs in this matter.

This ruling serves as a reminder that relying solely on notings in government files does not confer any rights or entitlements. It emphasizes the significance of formal orders communicated to the parties involved, thereby providing clarity on the legal implications of inter-departmental communications in matters of land allotment.

Date of Decision: July 12, 2023

Latest Legal News