Supreme court questions lokayuktas authority in land dispute case
Title: ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR & ANR V URMILA.G
Citation: CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2023 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.2652 OF 2023)
Dated on: 30.11.2023
Coram: HON’BLE JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH & JUSTICE RAJESH BINDLA
In an important case before the Supreme Court, the scope of the Lokayukta’s authority is being questioned. The disagreement began with a complaint about land records and has since centered on the legitimacy of Lokayukta’s directions. With no representation from the opposing party, the case emphasizes the practical ramifications of judicial proceedings and the need of procedural correctness. Justice Rajesh Bindal J delivering the verdict has given direction to the parties to meet ends of justice.
Brief facts
The present case revolves around a complaint filed with the Lokayukta regarding inaccuracies in income records and land ownership changes. The complainant requested that these inaccuracies be corrected and that the land in question be transferred to the rightful heirs of the late K. Gopalakrishnan Nair. The Upa Lokayukta issued directions for corrective measures, such as record correction and tax payment, to be completed within a specific time limit the appellants filed a Writ Petition at the High Court, seeking to have the Upa Lokayukta’s ruling quashed. However, the High Court dismissed the Writ Petition, maintaining the Upa Lokayukta’s orders. Aggrieved by this the petitioners approached the supreme court.
Court analysis and judgement
The Supreme Court in a judgement delivered by Justice Rajesh Bindla J granted the appeal and overturned the orders of the Upa Lokayukta and the High Court, which had sustained them. The Court relied on two previous High Court decisions that concluded that the Upa Lokayukta lacked the authority to provide positive directives and that the complainants must seek legislative remedies to repair the revenue records. The Court further noted that respondent no. 1 had not appealed the Additional Tehsildar’s ruling, which denied the plea for record rectification. Court’s Direction: The Court directed respondent no. 1 to seek any suitable remedy under the applicable statute for the repair of the revenue records, as advised.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Namitha Ramesh