Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (1.26 seconds)
Documents citing Bindeshwari vs Board Of Revenue And Ors. on 21 December, 2001

Lallau vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., ... on 25 July, 2025

9. Reiterating a similar view in the case of Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue & Ors., 20025 (1) AWC 498, it was stated that mutation proceedings do not adjudicate the rights of parties and orders passed in the said proceedings are always subject to adjudication by the competent court and therefore a writ petition against an order in mutation proceedings would not be entertainable. It was observed as follows:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - A Mathur - Full Document

Santosh Kumar @ Santosh @ Santosh Kumar ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, ... on 25 July, 2025

9. Reiterating a similar view in the case of Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue & Ors., 20025 (1) AWC 498, it was stated that mutation proceedings do not adjudicate the rights of parties and orders passed in the said proceedings are always subject to adjudication by the competent court and therefore a writ petition against an order in mutation proceedings would not be entertainable. It was observed as follows:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - A Mathur - Full Document

Moharram Ali vs Addl. Commissioner, Devi Patan Mandal, ... on 25 July, 2025

8. Reiterating a similar view in the case of Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue & Ors., 20025 (1) AWC 498, it was stated that mutation proceedings do not adjudicate the rights of parties and orders passed in the said proceedings are always subject to adjudication by the competent court and therefore a writ petition against an order in mutation proceedings would not be entertainable. It was observed as follows:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - A Mathur - Full Document

Gudha Devi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue ... on 25 July, 2025

11. Reiterating a similar view in the case of Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue & Ors., 20025 (1) AWC 498, it was stated that mutation proceedings do not adjudicate the rights of parties and orders passed in the said proceedings are always subject to adjudication by the competent court and therefore a writ petition against an order in mutation proceedings would not be entertainable. It was observed as follows:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - A Mathur - Full Document

Ramkishan vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue ... on 30 July, 2025

10. Reiterating a similar view in the case of Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue & Ors., 20025 (1) AWC 498, it was stated that mutation proceedings do not adjudicate the rights of parties and orders passed in the said proceedings are always subject to adjudication by the competent court and therefore a writ petition against an order in mutation proceedings would not be entertainable. It was observed as follows:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - A Mathur - Full Document

Ashok Kumar And Others vs Additional Commissioner ... on 23 July, 2025

12. Reiterating a similar view in the case of Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue & Ors., 2002 (1) AWC 498 it was stated that mutation proceedings do not adjudicate the rights of parties and orders passed in the said proceedings are always subject to adjudication by the competent court and therefore a writ petition against an order in mutation proceedings would not be entertainable. It was observed as follows:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 32 - Cited by 0 - A Mathur - Full Document

Indraj And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Revenue Civil ... on 31 July, 2025

13. Reiterating a similar view in the case of Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue & Ors., 20025 (1) AWC 498, it was stated that mutation proceedings do not adjudicate the rights of parties and orders passed in the said proceedings are always subject to adjudication by the competent court and therefore a writ petition against an order in mutation proceedings would not be entertainable. It was observed as follows:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - A Mathur - Full Document

Prabhat Kumar Agarwal vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of ... on 14 August, 2025

10. Reiterating a similar view in the case of Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue & Ors., 20025 (1) AWC 498, it was stated that mutation proceedings do not adjudicate the rights of parties and orders passed in the said proceedings are always subject to adjudication by the competent court and therefore a writ petition against an order in mutation proceedings would not be entertainable. It was observed as follows:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - A Mathur - Full Document

Shyam Lal Verma And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of ... on 14 August, 2025

8. Reiterating a similar view in the case of Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue & Ors., 20025 (1) AWC 498, it was stated that mutation proceedings do not adjudicate the rights of parties and orders passed in the said proceedings are always subject to adjudication by the competent court and therefore a writ petition against an order in mutation proceedings would not be entertainable. It was observed as follows:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - A Mathur - Full Document

Devaki Nandan And 2 Others vs Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lko. ... on 4 September, 2025

9. Reiterating a similar view in the case of Bindeshwari Vs. Board of Revenue & Ors., 20025 (1) AWC 498, it was stated that mutation proceedings do not adjudicate the rights of parties and orders passed in the said proceedings are always subject to adjudication by the competent court and therefore a writ petition against an order in mutation proceedings would not be entertainable. It was observed as follows:-
Allahabad High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - A Mathur - Full Document
1   2 Next