AB GANI DAR Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT No. 28, namely Badri Nath Koul, is admittedly the owner of 14 kanals and 17 marlas of land under survey nos. 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42 and 43 in Village Gadiseer, to whom it has devolved for forefathers. Petitioners claiming to be tenants of the land right since the times of their forefathers and thereby in possession thereof till date, allege that the said respondent executed a power of attorney in respect of land in favour of respondents 26 and 27, who, equipped therewith sought and got sale permissions from Divisional Commissioner and sold the land to other respondents i.e 1 to 25 under registered sale deeds yet to be registered in certain cases. Claiming that these sale deeds were prejudicial to their rights, the petitioners instituted an appeal against Divisional Commissioners Sale permission aforesaid before the Financial Commissioner which was admittedly time barred and dismissed as such by him under his order dated 06.07.2005.

(2.) AGGRIEVED thereby the petitioners challenge the same through this writ petition on various grounds. First, that having been in continuous possession of the land as tenants thereof they would automatically become prospective owners u/s 4 of the Agrarian Reforms Act, and after completion of levy etc., would acquire title thereto u/s 8 of the aforesaid Act., which prospect stands blurred by sale of the land as aforesaid. Secondly, that as tenants of the land since immemorial times they could not be dispossessed by respondents on strength of whatever document might have been executed in their favour by respondent no. 28, and accordingly seek quashment of Financial Commissioners order aforesaid of dismissing their appeal.

(3.) IN their reply the respondents 1 to 25 separately and respondent no.28 through separate memo of reply have besides denying their claim of tenancy contended that petitioners having raised crucial question of fact, determination whereof would be essential for settlement of the matter, the writ petition would not lie, particularly because the remedy already exhausted by the petitioners has not yielded them anything. During course of submissions the learned counsel appearing for rival sides have besides reiterating the contents of their pleadings referred to the annexures also to canvass their respective points of view.