CHANDRA BHAN SINGH versus LATAFAT ULLAH KHAN & ORS.
Competent Officer under the Evacuee Interest (Separation) Act, 1951 does not have statutory power to review his own orders. But when the respondents unlawfully invoked the review jurisdiction for their advantage, their conduct disentitled them to relief in writ jurisdiction. Thus, the High Court erred in ignoring the conduct of the parties, and the writ petition should have been dismissed.
- Parties
- Appellant: Chandra Bhan Singh; Respondent: Latafat Ullah Khan; Respondent: Mohammad Sharafat Ullah Khan; Respondent: Shaukat Ullah Khan; Respondent: Aman Ullah Khan; Respondent: Habib Ullah Khan; Respondent: Nasar Ullah Khan
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 19 September 1978
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order of the Allahabad High Court Dated 16 12 1966 in S.c.a. No. 346/66
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Evacuee Interest (separation) Act, 1951 Review Powers, Jurisdiction of Competent Officer, Practice and Procedure in Writ Petitions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Chandra Bhan Singh
Appellant
Latafat Ullah Khan
Respondent
Mohammad Sharafat Ullah Khan
Respondent
Shaukat Ullah Khan
Respondent
Aman Ullah Khan
Respondent
Habib Ullah Khan
Respondent
Nasar Ullah Khan
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order of the Allahabad High Court Dated 16 12 1966 in S.c.a. No. 346/66
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Competent Officer under the Evacuee Interest (Separation) Act, 1951 has power to review his own orders
- 2 Effect of conduct of parties on grant of relief in writ petitions
- 3 Jurisdictional bar under Section 18 of Evacuee Interest (Separation) Act, 1951
Ratio Decidendi
Competent Officer under the Evacuee Interest (Separation) Act, 1951 does not have statutory power to review his own orders. But when the respondents unlawfully invoked the review jurisdiction for their advantage, their conduct disentitled them to relief in writ jurisdiction. Thus, the High Court erred in ignoring the conduct of the parties, and the writ petition should have been dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Impugned judgment of the High Court dated February 26, 1964 is set aside.
- Writ petition is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment