R.H. Zaidi, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record.
(2.) The present petition arises out of the proceedings under Section 34 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act and is directed against the orders passed by the courts below, dated 5.1.1992 and 14.11.2000.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3 raised preliminary objection to the maintainability of the present petition. It was urged that the mutation proceedings are summary in nature and the title of the parties are not decided in these proceedings. Orders passed by the Courts in the said proceedings have got no binding effect on the regular side and do not operate res-judicata between the parties. The party aggrieved by the orders passed in those proceedings, has got the liberty to approach the competent authority for declaration of his rights and for other appropriate relief. The writ petition is, thus, liable to be dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy. Reliance is being placed upon the decisions of this Court in the cases of Smt. Lakhmati and another v. The Board of Revenue, U.P. Allahabad and another, 1984 RD 378. and Brahma Deo and others v. Board of Revenue, U.P. and another, 1986 RD 302.;