HEAM DEVI Vs. J&K SPECIAL TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are aggrieved of the order dtd. 16/2/2018 passed by the Jammu and Kashmir Special Tribunal, Jammu in case titled 'Chatter Singh and others vs. Sanjeev Anthal and another' by virtue of which, the revision filed by the petitioners under the J and K Agrarian Reforms Act has been dismissed and the order dtd. 10/11/2016 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner (with powers of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms), Udhampur has been upheld.

(2.) Briefly stating the facts which arise in this petition are as under; Mutation of the land measuring 32 Kanals 12 Marias falling under Khasra No. 50 of village Batna, Tehsil Chenani was attested in favour of one Mehndi under Sec. 8 of the Agrarian Reforms Act. This Mutation was challenged by the petitioners before the Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur with the powers of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms, and the same was set aside vide order dtd. 27/10/2005. The Addl. Deputy Commissioner (with powers of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms) allowed the appeal, set aside the mutation No. 62 dtd. 29/8/1980 and remanded the case to the Tehsildar, Chenani for holding fresh enquiry. The land measuring 32 Kanals 12 Marias falling under Khasra No. 50 of village Batna, Tehsil Chenani was owned by Thakur Udhay Chand S/o. Bashesher Chand, who died in the year 1978. This land fell in the share of Little Chand grand son of Thakur Udhay Chand, the petitioners, thus, became tenants of Sh. Little Chand. Mehndi and his brother Titru, however, were recorded as occupancy tenants by virtue of Mutation No. 62 dtd. 29/8/1980, the ownership was, therefore, transferred in favour of Mehndi, as the owner was out of possession, therefore, the land was vested in the State under Sec. 4 of the Agrarian Reforms Act.

(3.) This mutation order No. 62 dtd. 29/8/1980 was challenged by petitioner No. 1 claiming possession along with his three other brothers. The appeal was filed against Punjabo S/o. Mehndi and the Additional Deputy Commissioner (with powers of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms) Udhmapur accepted the appeal, setting aside Mutation No. 62 dtd. 29/8/1980 and remanded the case back to the Tehsildar, Chenani for holding fresh enquiry and attesting mutation in accordance with law.