news details |
|
|
| Dashnami Akhara land in valley is migrant property: HC | | Directs SSP CB to register case, investigate | | Jammu Jan 13,
Justice Bashir Ahmed Kirmani of J&K High Court at Srinagar Wing has directed SSP Crime Branch to register a case in the matter and investigate into the factum of the powers of attorney attributed to "Dashmani Akhada" and tenants of land claimed by the attorney holders namely Mohd Yousaf Kuchai and Mohd Yaqoob Shah and other circumstances leading to the attestation of mutation and filed action taken report within 3 months.
Court also directed Revenue Secretary to Identify the Revenue Officer who attested mutation and conduct departmental enquiry into circumstances and report follow-up action within 3 months.
These directions have been issued in a writ petition filed by Mohd Shafi Dar Vs State and Ors regarding the land measuring 28 Kanals 7 Marlas situated at Rawal Pora Estate under mutation No 4399, where the land previously recorded in the ownership of Akhada Basimia through Baba Sant Rajinder Sadu and tendency of Rajab, Lasoo, Sulla and Gulla as protected tenants to the extent of their respective shares in the name of petitioner on the ground that attorney holders of tenants and "Dashmani Akhada" namely Mohd Yousaf Kuchai and Mohd Yaqoob Shah respectively stated jointly that they had no objection in change of entries in favour of the petitioner-society and attested the mutation.
This mutation was challenged by Mohd Yaqoob attorney holder of "Dashmani Akhada" through a revision petition before Financial Commissioner, who set-aside the mutation on the ground that it had been attested by Naib-Tehsildar, who was not competent to attest the same and directed District Magistrate, Budgam to take the possession of the land as migrant property. This order was also challenged in the High Court.
Justice Bashir Ahmed Kirmani after hearing Advocate MY Parray appearing for the petitioner and Advocate NH Shah appearing for the respondents observed that the question of Dashmani Akhada's ownership over the land and how the attesting officer transferred to petitioner-society because u/s 121 of Land Revenue Act where under the mutation is shown to have been attested, it is only when during a revision of record of rights a question of title arises, the power of Assistant Collector First Class to decide the same comes in. In the present case no such revision appears to have been going on. The attesting officer appears on the scene just out of blue and believing the alleged attorney holders, ordered change of entry in favour of petitioner-society without even trying to know as to who the ownership possession of land was transferred in favour of petitioner which vitiates the exercise of power by him and renders the mutation bad.
The Court further said that at this stage arises the question of the nature of the land and what the DM would have to do.
The "Dashmani Akhada" is well known Hindu Religious institution owning many properties. Since "Mahants", who managed these properties on behalf of the "Akhada" have either migrated or abandoned the "Akhada's Properties", this land can arguably be held to be a migrant property and custody deems to have vested in the concerned District Magistrate u/s 4 of the Act.
In the circumstances there was no question of effecting a change in ownership of land in question which renders all actions taken by concerned Revenue Officers including the mutation relied upon by petitioner's unlawful and hence bad, rendering the claim of possession, if any, on that basis totally unfounded. With these observations Court ordered that the Financial Commissioner's impugned order is maintained only to extent of oversetting the mutation No 4399 of Rawal Pora Estate attested on November 21, 1993. The order of District Magistrate dated October 22, 2002 set-aside. The land in question deems to be in his custody u/s 4 of the Act. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
