Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.19 seconds)
Basdev And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 6 Others on 29 August, 2022 cites

Jai Prakash Yadav Alias Makhanchu vs State Of U.P. on 2 November, 2020

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in similar facts the identical matters came up before this Court for consideration in Writ-B No. 561 of 2021 (Makhanchu Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others), Writ-B No. 575 of 2021 (Lautu Ram & Another Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others), Writ-B No. 578 of 2021 (Arjun Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) and Writ-B No. 2000 of 2021 (Suresh Kumar & Another Vs. DDC & 3 Others). Aforesaid writ petitions were allowed on the same day considering the illegality in the impugned order passed by the Consolidation Officer. Copies of the said orders are annexed with the present petition. In view of the orders passed in the aforesaid petitions, counsel for the petitioners submits that the instant writ petition may also be allowed.
Allahabad High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 8 - R Chaturvedi - Full Document

Lautu Ram And Another vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 28 July, 2021

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in similar facts the identical matters came up before this Court for consideration in Writ-B No. 561 of 2021 (Makhanchu Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others), Writ-B No. 575 of 2021 (Lautu Ram & Another Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others), Writ-B No. 578 of 2021 (Arjun Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) and Writ-B No. 2000 of 2021 (Suresh Kumar & Another Vs. DDC & 3 Others). Aforesaid writ petitions were allowed on the same day considering the illegality in the impugned order passed by the Consolidation Officer. Copies of the said orders are annexed with the present petition. In view of the orders passed in the aforesaid petitions, counsel for the petitioners submits that the instant writ petition may also be allowed.
Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 27 - S K Rai - Full Document

Ram Krishna Mishra Son Of Late Arjun ... vs State Of U.P., U.P. State Bridge ... on 18 January, 2006

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in similar facts the identical matters came up before this Court for consideration in Writ-B No. 561 of 2021 (Makhanchu Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others), Writ-B No. 575 of 2021 (Lautu Ram & Another Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others), Writ-B No. 578 of 2021 (Arjun Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) and Writ-B No. 2000 of 2021 (Suresh Kumar & Another Vs. DDC & 3 Others). Aforesaid writ petitions were allowed on the same day considering the illegality in the impugned order passed by the Consolidation Officer. Copies of the said orders are annexed with the present petition. In view of the orders passed in the aforesaid petitions, counsel for the petitioners submits that the instant writ petition may also be allowed.
Allahabad High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 40 - S Yadav - Full Document

Suresh Kumar Singh & Anr. vs D.D.C., Faizabad & 4 Ors. on 2 July, 2010

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in similar facts the identical matters came up before this Court for consideration in Writ-B No. 561 of 2021 (Makhanchu Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others), Writ-B No. 575 of 2021 (Lautu Ram & Another Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others), Writ-B No. 578 of 2021 (Arjun Vs. State of U.P. and 3 Others) and Writ-B No. 2000 of 2021 (Suresh Kumar & Another Vs. DDC & 3 Others). Aforesaid writ petitions were allowed on the same day considering the illegality in the impugned order passed by the Consolidation Officer. Copies of the said orders are annexed with the present petition. In view of the orders passed in the aforesaid petitions, counsel for the petitioners submits that the instant writ petition may also be allowed.
Allahabad High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 11 - N Shukla - Full Document
1