JABAR MALIK Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Judgment dated 12.10.2017 rendered in OWP No.699/2008 titled "Mst. Taja v. Financial Commissioner and others ", is assailed by medium of this appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent.

(2.) Noticing precise factual matrix of the case shall be advantageous for appreciating the matter in its right perspective:

(3.) The order on mutation has been passed in presence of respondent Mst. Taja, which fact she has re-affirmed while executing confirmation agreement on 10th October 1983. How could such a huge delay be condoned when there is no acceptable explanation forthcoming. After all, in the year 1981 when mutation has been attested, respondent Mst. Taja was major. She is shown to have made a statement in presence of village body including village guard. Then in the order of mutation it is clearly mentioned that the Tehsildar has made it clear to her that she is not bound to say that the property shall be mutated in favour of her brother, despite that she has stated that the property shall be mutated in favour of her brother. The position of attestation of mutation has been reaffirmed in the deed of confirmation of relinquishment dated 12th October, 1983. Such a person cannot be allowed to claim condonation of delay, that too without any justified cause.