DES RAJ Vs. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved and have assailed an order dtd. 28/4/2004 passed by the Jammu and Kashmir Special Tribunal, Jammu [the Tribunal"] in file No.210 (Revision) titled Jia Lal and another v. Des Raj and others , whereby the order of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms (Additional Deputy Commissioner), Udhampur dtd. 2/7/2001 and those of Additional Tehsildar, Udhampur passed on Mutation No.178, 324 and 351 dtd. 15/5/1974, 29/3/1991 and 14/9/1991 respectively have been set aside.

(2.) Respondent Nos. 3 to 11 ["private respondents"] were the owners of the land in dispute, however, the petitioners herein had been shown in cultivating possession thereof long prior to kharief 1971. The petitioners also claim to be in cultivating possession of the said land in kharief 1971 and thereafter. The Additional Tehsildar ["Tehsildar Agrarian Reforms, Udhampur]" attested mutation Nos.178 dtd. 15/5/1974 under Sec. 4 of the Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 ["the Act"] to vest the land in question in State and declared the petitioners prospective owners. As a consequence thereof, mutation Nos. 324 and 352 dtd. 29/3/1991 and 14/9/1991 respectively were attested under Sec. 8 of the Act conferring ownership rights upon the petitioners on payment of levy. The private respondents, feeling aggrieved of the mutation orders, filed three separate appeals before the Commissioner Agrarian Reforms, Udhampur on 14/9/2000. The said appeals came to be dismissed by the Commissioner, Agrarian Reforms, Udhampur vide his order dtd. 2/7/2001 on the ground that the appeals were hopelessly time barred. Feeling dissatisfied and aggrieved by order dtd. 2/7/2001 passed by the Commissioner Agrarian Reforms, the private respondents filed a revision petition challenging the aforesaid composite order before the Jammu and Kashmir Special Tribunal, Jammu ["the Tribunal"]. The revision petition was accepted and the impugned order in three appeals filed by the private respondents passed by the Commissioner Agrarian Reforms, Udhampur was set aside. It is this order of the Tribunal, which is called in question in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Submissions

(3.) The order impugned is challenged by the petitioners primarily on two counts:-