(1.) The mutation bearing No. 780 was attested on 27/2/1984 under sec. 8 of the Agrarian Reforms Act (for short the Act) thereby conferring ownership rights in favour of Jeeta S/o Phula- predecessor in interest of the respondents for the land comprising survey No. 385 measuring 2 kanal 9 marlas situated at Village Jagti Morha Karli and prior to the issuance of mutation, the land was escheated in favour of the State and the predecessor in interest of the respondents was declared as prospective owner by virtue of mutation attested under sec. 4 of the Act.
(2.) The contention of the petitioners is that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between Jeeta i.e. predecessor in interest of the respondents and the owners, namely, Durga Dass and Krishna Devi, who were recorded as owners in the revenue record of girdawari of the year, 1969. The said Jeeta had in fact purchased 3 kanal 9 marlas of land comprising survey No. 385 from Beli Ram by virtue of sale deed and he was never inducted as tenant by any of the owners namely, Durga Dass and Krishna Devi over 2 kanals 9 marlas of land comprising survey No. 385. It is stated that the fictitious entry in kharif 1971 and that too without order of competent authority was made in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents. It was highly doubtful and further the same could not have formed the basis of attestation of mutation under sec. 4 of the Act, on the basis of which subsequent mutation under sec. 8 of the Act was attested in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents.
(3.) The petitioners claim that the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners filed an appeal against the mutations under sec. 4 and 8 of the Act and both these appeals were decided by the appellate authority i.e. Joint Commissioner, Agrarian Reforms Jammu vide order dtd. 22/5/2004. Against the dismissal of the appeals, revision petition was filed before the J&K Special Tribunal Jammu and the said revision petition too was dismissed vide order dtd. 23/7/2014.