order passed by the Collector, North-West District, Delhi and that passed by the Financial Commissioner in appeal, whereby an order attesting a mutation ... also appear to have been passed. In so far as the mutation order passed by the Naib Tehsildar was concerned, respondents 4 to 9 preferred
erroneous one. He passed the said order on the ground that the Government had ordered for mutation of the land. The orders passed ... Government to him as an order in his favour and he passed an order for mutation. This was cancelled by the Revenue Divisional Officer
Tehsildar,
Bilaspur in Mutation Record Nos. 228-B of 1996 and 229-B of
1996. According to the petitioner, the mutation orders were
obtained fraudulently ... mutation order dated
07th March, 1996 and order dated 30th August, 1991. The
Collector, Rampur, dismissed all the three revision
applications by order dated 16th
then, Collector set aside that mutation order vide
order dated 24/03/1986. Thereafter, the land was again mutated in the names
of complainant Munnalal ... mutation of the said
land on their names, on which he got notice published and thereafter as per
Rule passed the mutation order in favour
original
plaintiffs as mentioned above in the order and the petitioners
have filed the orders of mutation in the writ petition. It means
that ... authorities i.e. order dated 07.06.2012 passed by the Sub-
divisional Officer, order dated 19.06.2013 passed by the Upper
Collector, order dated 24.02.2015 passed
lapse of 19 years
complainant Dhannalal, out of greed challenged the mutation order dated
17.5.1995 (Annexure-D-4) before the SDO Gadarwara on 25.2.2014 which ... mutated his name in the revenue record. Mutation of any person
recorded after inviting the objection on the mutation and after that revenue
Officer mutated
this petition. Suffice it to
say that on consent basis the mutation orders were passed by
the Revenue Inspector ... order to hold that on the
basis of any valid conveyance deed in favour of respondents 2 to
9, the consent order of mutation
adducing
evidence. For the Garmajurwa Malik land, petitioner
passed mutation order on the basis of running name of
Chandan Sao and Bharat Sao. The name ... that the petitioner has
followed all the statutory procedures for passing mutation
order before the petitioner was not entitle to empower
14
transfer of land
under Order 7 Rule 11 of the C.P.C . and by the second order, learned Additional District Judge has affirmed the order of learned ... basis of which mutation had already taken place and therefore filed an application for recall of the mutation order dated 31.08.1974. Though, even before
Khazan Singh mutated in their names
in the revenue record vide mutation serial no. 457 dated 20.5.1996 and which
order was illegal. It was then ... defendants, however,
mutation does not confer any title, and I am taking the present suit as not for
cancelling of the mutation order in favour
