Considered. Admit.

1. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, this LPA which is directed against the judgement dated 31-12-2001 recorded by the learned Single Judge in OWP No. 285/99 is taken up final disposal.

2. The incontrovertable facts leading up to the filing of this appeal are that one Tirath Singh son of Ganga Singh, the predecessor-in-interest of respondents NO1 to 4 herein being a Displaced person from Pak Occupied Kashmir area of Tehsil uri District Muzzafarbad was rehabilitated by the Govt. of Jammu & Kashmir by alloting him land as displaced person in two villages : land measuring about 3 kanal and 9 marlas comprising of Rh. No.43-min located at village Marh Bagh and land measuring about 5 kanals 3 marlas comprising of Kh.No. 62 located at Channi Mawalian in Tehsil Jammu was allotted to him. Said Tirath Singh being a Displaced person was put in possession of these lands by virtue of annexure-a dated 24th Asoj 2011 Bk. Consequent upon delivery of possession, the lands were muted in his name as allottee. Out of this, the lands measuring 5 kanals 9 marlas located at Channi Mawalian Comprising Kh.No. 62-min which as per said Tirath Singh was in his personal cultivation but came to be entered by the Revenue Authorities in the name of appellant™s father namely, Maggar Singh in his cultivating possession in the Khasra Girdawari maintained for the said village. In this behalf, Tirath Singh came to file an application for correction of this entry in the Khasra Girdawari before the Tehsildar Agrarian Reforms Jammu, on the ground that said entry has been made at his back and there exists no relationship of landlord and tenant between him and said Maggar Singh father of the appellant. The Tehsildar Agrarian Reforms came to reject this application, against this order appeal was filed before the Joint Financial Commissioner with the powers of Commissioner under the Agrarian Reforms Act (herein after referred to as the Commissioner) by the said Tirath Singh the displaced person, who came to dismiss the same by virtue of his order dated 30-11-1987. This order came to be challenged in revision by Tirath Singh before the special Tribunal (Tribunal in Short) Jammu who by virtue of order dated 30-04-1990 came to allow motion of revision and came to remand the case for disposal to the Tehsildar Agrarian Reforms, Jammu with the following observations:-

................an important question of law has been ignored. Section 4 of the Agrarian Reforms Act in clear terms provides that the provisions of sub-section (1) regarding extinguishment of all rights, title and interest in land of any person not cultivating it personally in Kharif 1971 and vesting these rights in the state does not apply to the land mentioned in schedule-II alloted to a displaced person. As a necessary corrolary it follows that no tenant can become prospective owner of such land. Here, it needs to be emphasized that according to proviso (i) and (ii) to clause (c) of sub section (2) of section 4, if the land alloted to a displaced person is situated in two villages and he cultivated personally the land in at least on village in Kharif 1971, he shall be deemed to be personally cultivating the land in the other village as well, even if he does not actually do so. It was in pursuance of this provision that the then Circle Officer had recorded in the Khasra Girdawari that the petitioner is deemed to be personally cultivating the land in question as he personally cultivated the land situated in village Marh Bagh which had been alloted to him in addition to the land in S.No. 62-min situated in village Channi Mawalian, the disputed land herein. This important aspect does not seem to have been considered either by the Tehsildar or the Commissioner, Agrarian Reforms.

3. On receipt of file back after remand by the Tehsildar Agrarian Reforms by virtue of his order dated 06-05-1991, came to reject the application of Tirath Singh displaced person for