1. The writ petitioners by means of this writ petition have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court in seeking to quash the order dated 16.10.2000 passed by the Jammu and Kashmir Special Tribunal, Jammu by virtue of which the mutation orders of Naib Tehsildar, Vijaypur and Tehsildar, Agrarian Reforms, Samba and set-aside.

2. The case of the petitioners as projected in the writ petition is that Shri Rasal Singh, the predecessor-in-interest of petitioner No.1, was declared as tenant of the land aggregating 04 kanals and 04 marlas in village Gagore, Tehsil Samba by mutation No. 157 attested by the Naib Tehsildar, Vijaypur. Shri Rasal Singh was also conferred the ownership rights by the Tehsildr, Agrarian Reforms, Samba, vide mutation No. 161 attested under section 8 of the Agrarian Reforms Act on 07.08.1986. In the like manner, mutation No. 172 dated 10.03.1983 was attested under Section 4 of the Agrarian Reforms Act. In declaring Shri Anant Singh as prospective owner of the land measuring 11 marlas and 16 marlas situated in village Gagote, Tehsil Samba. Tehsildar, Agrarian Reforms, Samba, vide mutation No. 173 attested mutation on 10.05.1988 and conferred ownership rights on petitioner No.2, Shri Anant Singh on the land measuring 11 kanals and 16 marlas in the said village.

3. Aggrieved by these mutations attested in favour of the petitioners by the Revenue Authorities, the respondents assailed their correctness before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Agrarian Reforms (Appeal), Jammu on the grounds that there never existed relationship of tenant and landlord between the parties and the mutations, attested in their absence and without affording and opportunity of being heard, were bad in law, being violative of principles of natural justice. The Additional Deputy Commissioner, Agrarian Reforms, Jammu, however, dismissed the appeals, holding that there was no legal infirmity in the mutations and the properity and legality of which was challenged in Revision before the Jammu & Kashmir Special Tribunal, Jammu. The order of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Agrarian Reforms (Appeal), Jammu was set aside alongwith the mutation orders passed by the Revenue Authorities on the respective lands in favour of the petitioners, by the Jammu & Kashmir Special Tribunal on 16.10.2000, which became the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.

4. The stand of the respondents put across in their demurrer in reiterating their consistent pleas both before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Agrarian Reforms (Appeal), Jammu and the Jammu & Kashmir Special Tribunal, Jammu in Revision is that there existed no relationship of tenant and landlord, but they happened to be the co-sharers. That the mutations have been attested without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard and the orders of mutations passed at their back are legally untenable being violative of principles of natural justice. It was further contended that co-sharers cannot take the benefits under section 4 of the Agrarian Reforms Act and, therefore, proprietary rights cannot be conferred on Shri Rasal Singh, who is the predecessor-in-interest of petitioner No.1, and also on Shri Anant Singh, petitioner No.2, as the property has not been partitioned and the parties are still continuing to be the co-sharers.

5. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties in extensor and also perused the record available on file meticulously.

6. It may be pointed out at the first flush that there is nothing on record to suggest that there was ever partition of the land in question between the parties. This position has also not been disputed by Mr. R.S. Thakur, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, during the course of arguments. It is also not borne out from the record to indicate that the respondents, at any point of time, were associated with proceedings both before the Naib Tehsildar, Vijaypur and Tehsildar, Agrarian Reforms, Samba in mutation