Aryan Sharma vs U.T Of J& K & Ors
2026 Latest Caselaw 897 J&K

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Aryan Sharma vs U.T Of J& K & Ors on 18 February, 2026

                                                                      Serial No. 151

  HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                                AT JAMMU

WP (C) No. 375/2026
CM No. 877/2026

Aryan Sharma                                        .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
                      Through: Mr. Sachin S. Sharma, Advocate.

                 vs
U.T of J& K & Ors.                                             ..... Respondent(s)
                       Through: Ms. Nazia Fazal, AC vice
                                Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG for R-1 to 4.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, JUDGE
                                    ORDER

(18.02.2026)

01. Petitioner, through the medium of this petition, seeks quashment and setting aside of judgment/order dated 09.02.2026, passed by learned Financial Commissioner (Revenue) with powers of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms, in File No. 1579/FC-AP, titled, "Suman Sharma Vs. Deputy Commissioner Udhampur & Ors', whereby, Revision Petition filed by respondent No. 5, against order dated 07.10.2025 has been allowed and accordingly, mutation No. 15 dated 17.12.2008 attested in their favour with respect to the estate of deceased Late. Suneet Sharma has been set aside, with further prayer to allow the present petition and further uphold the order dated 07.10.2025, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur.

02. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the mutation had been upheld by respondent -Deputy Commissioner, in view of the fact that there was a delay of 17 years in filing the appeal against the attestation of mutation which had been attested, in the presence of appellant/respondent No. 5. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment passed by the Apex Court in case, titled, "State of Jharkhand & Ors Vs. Ankush

Kumar Chokhani & Ors", reported in AIR 2009 SCC 1927, wherein, it has been held that merits of the case cannot be considered while dealing with the application for condonation of delay, in filing the appeal argued that the Revisional Court had allowed the revision petition simply on the fact that the revisional petitioner had merit in her case, ignoring the inordinate delay of 17 years in filing the appeal before the appropriate forum.

03. Heard.

04. Notice.

05. Ms. Nazia Fazal, Assisting counsel appearing vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, learned Sr. AAG, waives notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 to 4. She seeks and is granted four weeks' time for filing reply.

06. Notice shall be issued to respondent No. 5, returnable within a period of four weeks, subject to the filing of requisites within one week.

07. List on 21.04.2026.

08. Meanwhile, subject to objections and till next date of hearing before the Bench, the impugned order dated 09.02.2026, shall remain stayed.

(M A CHOWDHARY) JUDGE

Jammu 18.02.2026 Renu