Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Sri Kameshwar Vidyalay Niwar Khas v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 43519 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 14434 (27 August 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 43519 of 2006

Sri Kameshwar Vidyalaya Niwar Khas


State of U. P. and others

Hon'ble Krishna Murari, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondents no. 1 to 3 and Sri Anuj Kumar appearing for respondent no.4.

By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 11.1.2002 passed by the Deputy Collector, Sadar, Moradabad in a proceeding under Section 33/39 of Land Revenue Act, and the subsequent order dated 16.2.2006 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Moradabad Division, Moradabad dismissing the Revision No. 73/2004-05 under Section 219 of Land Revenue Act filed by the petitioner.

From the perusal of the impugned orders, it is clear that this petition arises out of mutation proceedings. It has been the consistent view of this Court that writ petition challenging the order passed in mutation proceeding is not to be normally entertained. It is well settled that proceedings for mutation under the Land Revenue Act are summary in nature and do not finally determine the title of the parties. There is always alternative remedy of adjudication of title by filing a suit on the regular side. Reference may be made to the decision of this Court rendered in the case of Lal Bachan Vs. Board of Revenue, U. P., Lucknow and others, 2002(1), AWC-169 and Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue and others, 2002 (1) AWC 498.

In view of the above legal proposition, the present writ petition cannot be entertained and deserves to be dismissed.

It is, however, observed that the impugned orders passed in mutation proceedings being summary in nature will not come in the way of the petitioners in seeking adjudication of title before the competent court.

Subject to the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is dismissed.



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.