MUSTAQ AHMAD vs STATE OF U.P.,TH.REVENUE SECRETARY — C.A. No. 3802/2014

Case under Section III-A. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010129652007

Filing Date

01-May-2007

Registration No

C.A. No. 3802/2014

Diary Number

12965/2007

Order Date

11-Mar-2014

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Disposed Off

Last updated 28-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Section III-A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MUSTAQ AHMAD

    Adv. PUJA SHARMA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P.,TH.REVENUE SECRETARY

    Adv. VINAY GARG DINESH KUMAR GARG

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Mar-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 06-Jan-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  4. 23-Sep-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 04-Sep-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  6. 06-May-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 13-Feb-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 04-Dec-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 02-Jul-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 05-Aug-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 03-Nov-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 13-Jul-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  13. 22-Jul-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 09-Jul-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 29-Apr-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 27-Mar-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 22-Jan-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  18. 11-Oct-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  19. 11-Sep-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  20. 16-Jul-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  21. 14-May-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  22. 01-May-2007

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 3802/2014

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Mustaq Ahmad v. State of U.P. (Civil Appeal No. 3802/2014) The Supreme Court dismissed Mustaq Ahmad's appeal challenging a 1992 District Magistrate order that found his revenue entries as Bhumidhar/Sirdar of land in village Lolepur, Sultanpur district, were forged, with the land actually belonging to the Gram Sabha. The Court upheld both the District Magistrate's order and the High Court's dismissal of the writ petition, finding Ahmad possessed only lease documents but no ownership documents to substantiate his ownership claim. The appeal was disposed of with no relief granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case