<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Power of Review: executive quasi judicial officers lack authority to reopen finally vested land orders; the 2008 review is void.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97314</link>
    <description>Statutory limits on executive review of vested land orders are reaffirmed: conferral of Civil Court powers does not automatically grant an unrestricted review jurisdiction to executive quasi judicial officers, and statutes barring reopening of concluded vesting determinations preclude such reviews. The 2008 review purporting to set aside the 1971 vesting order was therefore without jurisdiction and void; the Tribunal&#039;s quashing of that review was properly restored. Separately, the review failed the narrow Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC tests (no newly discovered evidence shown, no mistake apparent on the record, and no analogous sufficient reason), so the 1971 vesting order remains operative.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2026 13:14:44 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2026 13:14:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=888648" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Power of Review: executive quasi judicial officers lack authority to reopen finally vested land orders; the 2008 review is void.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97314</link>
      <description>Statutory limits on executive review of vested land orders are reaffirmed: conferral of Civil Court powers does not automatically grant an unrestricted review jurisdiction to executive quasi judicial officers, and statutes barring reopening of concluded vesting determinations preclude such reviews. The 2008 review purporting to set aside the 1971 vesting order was therefore without jurisdiction and void; the Tribunal&#039;s quashing of that review was properly restored. Separately, the review failed the narrow Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC tests (no newly discovered evidence shown, no mistake apparent on the record, and no analogous sufficient reason), so the 1971 vesting order remains operative.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2026 13:14:44 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97314</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>