MUSHTAQ AHMED KHAN Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved and has challenged the order dtd. 11/10/2017 passed by the Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Kashmir in revision petition titled Mushtaq Ahmed Khan v. Hajira and others ["impugned order"].

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of the present petition, as projected by the petitioner in the petition, are that the petitioner purchased a piece of land measuring 6 kanal 12 marlas covered under Survey Nos.2164, 2142, 2185, 2200, 2231 and 2232 situated at village Hyhama Tehsil and district Kupwara ["the subject land"] from respondent No.3 and the same was subsequently mutated in the name of the petitioner.

(3.) Respondent No.2, it is claimed, in the year 2002 filed an appeal before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kupwara challenging mutation No.1891 dtd. 1/6/2001 on the ground that respondent No.2 being a khananasheen daughter was entitled to inherit the property of the father of the parties. The appeal was disposed of by the Additional Deputy Commissioner vide its order dtd. 12/5/2012. The impugned mutation was set aside. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed a revision petition in terms of Sec. 15 of the Land Revenue Act before the Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Kashmir. The Financial Commissioner, too, did not agree with the writ petitioner and eventually dismissed the revision petition vide order impugned in this petition. It is this order of the Financial Commissioner which the petitioner has challenged in this petition, inter alia, on the ground that the forums below have not appreciated that the petitioner was in possession of the subject land having purchased the same prior to 2000 from respondent No.3 and therefore, he could not have been divested of his right, which had been duly mutated in his favour and that the impugned order was passed by the Financial Commissioner without affording him any opportunity of being heard.