A writ petition under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act 1901 challenging an order in mutation proceedings was dismissed as it did not fall within the exceptions carved out in Lal Bachan Vs. Board of Revenue.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 30591 of 2007
Petitioner :- Smt. Ashrafi Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhiraj Srivastava,B.K. Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,V.K. Baranwal
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
This petition emanates from proceedings initiated under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act 1901. Bearing in mind the settled legal position in respect of challenges to orders passed in mutation proceedings and since the order impugned is not shown to fall within the exceptions as carved out in Lal Bachan Vs. Board of Revenue, U. P., Lucknow and others [2002(1)AWC 169], this petition is dismissed.
This order however, shall not preclude the petitioners from establishing their rights otherwise in accordance with law. Order Date :- 11.11.2019 LA/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act 1901 challenging mutation proceedings is maintainable in light of settled legal position and Lal Bachan Vs. Board of Revenue.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Lal Bachan Vs. Board of Revenue, U. P., Lucknow and othersReferred¶6
Lal Bachan Vs. Board of Revenue, U. P., Lucknow and others [2002(1)AWC 169]
Smt. Ashrafi
State of U.P.
Yashwant Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
