WPMS/687/2002
2023 Latest Caselaw 1958 UK

              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                       COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
             and Registrar's
                order with
               Signatures
                               WPMS No. 687 of 2002
                               Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. Mr. M. C. Kandpal, learned Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Devesh Kandpal, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Rakesh Kunwar, learned Addl. CSC for the State.

3. Mr. S.K. Jain, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 6 to 9.

4. Mr. M.C. Kandpal, learned Sr. Advocate for the petitioner, raises an issue while challenging the order of Board of Revenue by saying that there is no substantial question of law framed in the appeal.

5. In response to this, Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, counsel for the respondent nos. 6 to 9, refers to one of the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttarakhand Vs. Mohan Singh and others (2021) 13 SCC 281 and submits that in view of this judgment, there is no need to frame substantial question of law because this appeal pertains to Section 331 (4) of the U.P. Z.A. & L. R. Act, 1950 and the mandate of Section 100 of the CPC will not apply for framing of substantial question of law, as per amended Section 100 CPC.

6. During the course of arguments, another judgment of this Court in the case of Kharak Singh Vs. Board of Revenue and others 2013 (1) UD 92 is placed before this Court wherein there is a reference of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 13.09.2010 passed in SLP No. 23406 of 2008 and the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reads as under:

"A reading of order dated 21.7.2006 shows that the Additional Chief Revenue Commissioner allowed the second appeal preferred by the petitioner without framing any question of law much less substantial question of law. This was in clear violation of mandate of Section 331(4) of the Act, which reads as under:

"331(4) A second appeal shall lie on any of the grounds specified in Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908) from the final order of decree, passed in an appeal under sub-section (3), to the authority, if any, mentioned against it in column 6 of the Schedule aforesaid"

7. The issue, as raised by the parties, is required to be considered in the light of judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court and therefore, it requires some deliberations and considerations.

8. In view of this, list this case for final hearing on 01.09.2023.

(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 28.07.2023 SKS