SURISHTA DEVI Vs. J&K SPECIAL TRIBUNAL, JAMMU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has invoked extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court vested under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to assail judgment/order dtd. 19/4/2004 passed by the Jammu & Kashmir Special Tribunal, Jammu [hereinafter to be referred as 'the Tribunal"] in File No.STJ/268 titled Bimla Devi v. Savitri alias Taro and another.

(2.) One Mst. Sangtoo was the owner of land measuring 7 kanals 5 marlas comprising in Khasra No.228 min (new Khasra No.1182) measuring 1 kanal 19 marlas and Khasra No.228 min (new Khasra No.1197) measuring 1 kanal 15 marlas apart from other landed property situated at village Rathian (Fangial), Udhampur. As per the petitioner, with respect to the aforesaid land, mutation of inheritance being Mutation No.805 dtd. 24/3/1972 was attested in favour of mother of the petitioner, namely, Savitri Devi, father of respondent No.5 and husband of respondent No.6. Respondent No.5, it is alleged by the petitioner, in connivance with revenue officials got mutation No.1105 attested under Sec. 4 of the Agrarian Reforms Act on 5/5/1987 and later mutation No.1116 dtd. 6/7/1987, under Sec. 8 of the Agrarian Reforms Act. This was got done by respondent No.5 at the back of the mother of the petitioner.

(3.) On coming to know about the attestation of aforesaid mutation under Sec. 4 and 8, Savitri Devi preferred an appeal before the Joint Agrarian Reforms Commissioner, who vide its order dtd. 5/9/1997 set aside both the mutations and remanded the case to Tehsildar, Settlement, Udhampur for fresh consideration. It is stated by the petitioner that the Tehsildar, Settlement passed order dtd. 12/5/1998, without associating the mother of the petitioner with the proceedings, thereby directing that 5 kanals of land be recorded in the name of respondent No.5 and 2 kanals and 5 marlas in the name of respondent No.6, thereby depriving the mother of the petitioner of her share in the land, which comes to be 1/3rd.