Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Sakhi Mohd And Another vs U.T Of Jammu And Kashmir And Others on 28 August, 2024
Author: Wasim Sadiq Nargal
Bench: Wasim Sadiq Nargal
Sr.No.11
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP (C) No. 2059/2024
CM No. 5004/2024
Sakhi Mohd and another ....Appellant/Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. Z.A. Mughal, Advocate.
V/s
U.T of Jammu and Kashmir and others ....Respondent(s)
Through :- Ms. Aparna Gupta, assisting counsel to
Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE
ORDER
28.08.2024
01. The short submission which has been advanced by the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners is that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have no
competence or authority to review or revise the orders passed by the Tehsildar
and that they do not possess any revisional powers to call for the record of any
case pending or decided for passing orders.
02. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the
order impugned dated 23.02.2024 has been passed without issuing any notice to
the petitioners and affording an opportunity of being heard and the proceedings
have been taken at the back of the petitioners which is violative of principles of
natural justice. The petitioners are in peaceful possession, occupation and
cultivation of the land in question since time immemorial. The petitioners have
inherited the ownership rights from their predecessor-in-interest and are, in
occupation of land in question.
03. It is the specific case of the petitioners that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are
not competent to review or recall the orders passed by the Revenue Officers
subordinate to them i.e., Tehsildars and Naib-Tehsildars etc.
04. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners further submits that
even the power of revision is not available to the Deputy Commissioner
concerned as is envisaged from the bare perusal of Section 15 of the Land
Revenue Act which gives power of revision only to the Divisional
Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner and that too, on an application if
filed by the aggrieved person or suo moto.
05. It is the specific case of the petitioner that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have
not passed the impugned order while hearing an appeal against the Mutations
filed by a person aggrieved and the appellate powers so exercised in the instant
case is without jurisdiction.
06. Learned counsel for the petitioners with a view to fortify his claim has
placed reliance upon the judgment dated 07.02.2023 passed a Coordinate Bench
of this Court in WP (C ) No. 2571/2021 titled, "Mohd Farooq and others V/s
U.T of Jammu and Kashmir and others".
07. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the facts and law laid
down in the aforesaid case is fully applicable to the instant case. The Coordinate
Bench of this Court while deciding the aforesaid case has been pleased to
observe as under:-
"9.It is not anybody's case that the Deputy Commissioner,
Poonch has passed the impugned order while hearing an
appeal against Mutations No. 301 and 344 filed by a person
aggrieved. Needless to say that the Appellate powers cannot
be exercised by the Appellate Authority suo motu. Such
jurisdiction is required to be invoked by a person aggrieved.
10. Viewed from any angle, the order impugned passed by
the Deputy Commissioner, Poonch is bad in the eye of law
and, therefore, cannot sustain. Accordingly, this petition is
allowed and the impugned order passed by the Deputy
Commissioner, Poonch is quashed. It shall, however, remain
open to the Competent Authority under the Land Revenue
Act to pass appropriate orders in respect of the subject land
after providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the
petitioners".
08. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners at length and perused the record.
09. Prima facie, case for indulgence is made out.
10. Issue notice to the respondents.
11. Ms. Aparna Gupta, assisting counsel to Mrs. Monika Kohli, learned Sr.
AAG waives notice on behalf of the respondents.
12. List on 04.10.2024.
13. Meanwhile, subject to objections from the other side and till next date of
hearing before the Bench, the impugned order dated 23.02.2024 issued by
respondent No.3-Additional Deputy Commissioner, Nowshera shall remain
stayed.
Alteration/modification/vacation on motion.
(Wasim Sadiq Nargal)
Judge
Jammu:
28.08.2024
Renu
