NARESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF J AND K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this petition is to order No. DCJ/S-Q/210-11/1505-39 dated 11.08.2010 to the extent the order prohibits issuance of Fard-i-Intikhab i.e. copy of annual record/record of rights in respect of land where the type and the land is recorded as ''Chair Mumkin khud/Nallah/Pond''. The Petitioners question the impugned order on the grounds that the order has been issued mechanically in an arbitrary manner and in clourable exercise of jurisdiction and without any competence or authority. The impugned order, according to the Petitioners, who are estate holders in revenue circle of Halqa Chawadi, places blanket ban on issuance of revenue extracts in their favour, violating their constitutional rights to own, posses and enjoy immovable property and is thus liable to be quashed. The order is also said to be in conflict with and offend various provisions of Land Revenue Act 1996 (1939 A.D.) whereunder estate holders have a right not only inspect the record maintained but also to get extracts thereof on payments of prescribed fee.

(2.) The Respondents in their reply to the writ petition detail the background in which the impugned order was made. It is pleaded that the impugned order is referable to the prohibition imposed on transfer of land recorded as arak, kap, kahkrisham Under Section 20-B of Big Lands Estates Act, Svt. 2007 and Section 13 of Agrarian Reforms Act. The transfers of land made in violation of Section 20-B of Big Lands Estates Act samvat 2007 and Section 13 of the Agrarian Reforms Act, it is pleaded, is void ab-nitio. The Respondents insist that the Petitioners have no absolute right to enjoy, alienate the land in question or challenge user of such land. It is pointed out that the Petitioners as per their own admission, propose to alienate uncultivable land for construction purposes, unmindful of the position that such transfer is prohibited under law. The order in question is said to have been passed by Respondent No. 4 as District Collector in exercise of his power of superintendence and control over the subordinate Revenue Officers. The impugned order, it is pointed out, is issued to stop encroachment and constructions on water bodies like khads, nallahs and ponds and to maintain natural flow of water in the water bodies.

(3.) Heard and considered.