LAWS(J&K)-1976-7-5

SHAMBOO NATH Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

Decided On July 21, 1976
Shamboo Nath Appellant
V/S
FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a writ petition under section 103 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir. It is directed against an order of the Financial Commissioner, respondent No. 1. herein, whereby he has reversed the order of the .Assistant Commissioner, Srinagar directing the eviction of Sattar Malik and others, respondents 2 to 7 herein, from land under survey Nos. 125. 135, 351.135, 136, 137, 265 and 264 situate in village Haripora Haran, Tehsil Badgam.

(2.) IT appears that the respondents 2 to 7 were holding the land as tenants under the petitioners who were its owners. By his order dated 15 -10 -1969, the Assistant Commissioner, Srinagar, acting en the application of the petitioners landlords, ordered the eviction of the respondents -enants on the ground of non -satisfaction of a previous decree for arrears of rent. In revision filed by the respondents -tenants, the Divisional Commissioner found that the order was not justifiable. Accordingly, by his order dated 19 -4 -1975, the Divisional Commissioner made a recommendation to the Financial Commissioner that the revision petition be accepted and the impugned order set aside. On 4 -9 -1975, the Financial Commissioner accepted the recommendation and made an order accordingly. Aggrieved by the order of the Financial Commissioner, the petitioners -land lords have filed this writ petition and challenged the order as improper and unjustifiable in law.

(3.) AT the preliminary hearing of the petition for admission, the only point urged by Mr. K. N. Raina, appearing for the petitioners, was that the order of the Financial Commissioner was without jurisdiction. Because, said he, by virtue of section 52 of the Jammu and Kashmir agrarian Reforms Act. 1972, which was enacted and came into force during its pendency on 1 -5 -1973, the revision petition abated and, so, the Divisional Commissioner as also the Financial Commissioner lost the power and jurisdiction to deal with the same. Section 52 reads thus: -