The legal point established is that mutations attested in the absence of the appellant can be set aside, and administrative actions must adhere to the principle of natural justice.

1. This revision petition has been directed against the order of Additional Deputy Commissioner( with the powers of Agrarian Reforms Commissioner), Udhampur dated 22-10-2009, by virtue of which he has accepted the appeal of Respondent herein and has set aside the mutations No. 1286 dated 09-04-1982 attested under section 4 and mutation no. 1310 dated 27-3-1983 attested under section 8 of the Agrarian Reforms Act, regarding the land measuring 45 Kanals 18 Marla comprising under Khasra No. 535,539,735, 741, 742, 747, 759, 990,1020,1258 and 1259 situated at village Barolla Tehsil and District Udhampur and has remanded the case back to Tehsildar for de-novo enquiry.

2. Petitioners have challenged the impugned order on the grounds that the order is against facts and law. That respondent has failed to explain the delay in filling appeals before court below, That mutation no. 1286 attested u/s4 and mutation no. 1310 attested u/s 8 of Agrarian Reform Act were attested in the 1982 and 1983 respectively, where as appeal were filed on 28-5-05, no sufficient reason was shown for condoning the delay in filling the appeals. That land is still in possession of petitioners. That respondent was not adopted son of Dina Nath. That Late Dina Nath had executed a will deed on 23-12-74, with regard to the property in favour one Faquiru, the predecessor in interest of petitioner 1, 4, 5, & 6.

3. Heard. Perused the record of court below. Counsel for the petitioner had elaborated all the grounds mentioned in the memo of the appeal.

4. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the whole aspect of the matter.

5. Facts leading to the present case as is evident from record and arguments of counsel for petitioners are that, respondent herein by alleging adopted son of one Dina Nath, challenged two mutations attested u/s 4 and 8 of A R Act in favour of petitioners herein, with regard to the land measuring 45K-18M in different Khasra Nos. situated at Barolloa Tehsil and District Udhampur before Addl. Deputy Commissioner (with the powers of Agrarian Reforms Commissioner) Udhampur.

6. It was alleged and argued by respondent before court below that, he was minor and was adopted by late Dina Nath. That after the death of his adopted father his estates have devolved upon him by succession. A mutation no. 1248 has been attested in his favour on 28-4-1980 with regard to estate of his adopted father. Respondents/petitioners herein challenged the adoption deed in civil court, which was dismissed. That mutation dt. 28-4-1980 was challenged by filling appeal on 30-4-1981, before the Deputy Commissioner Udhampur and that appeal was accepted and case was remanded to Addl. Tehsildar Udhampur. This order of Deputy Commissioner was challenged in revision before Divisional Commissioner, Jammu by respondent and on 29-10-1983, and Divisional Commissioner made a recommendation to Financial Commissioner for accepting the revision petition. Financial Commissioner transferred the case to Joint Financial Commissioner for disposal, who on 20-4-1993, did not accept the recommendation and upheld the order of Deputy Commissioner. Thus case was remanded to Tehsildar (settlement) Udhampur. A writ petition was filed which was accepted and case was remanded to Financial Commissioner. Financial Commissioner thereafter accepted the recommendation of Divisional Commissioner on 23-9-08 and mutation no.1268 dt. 28.4.1980 was kept intact.

7. That during the pendency of above litigation respondents/ petitioners herein got attested two mutations one no. 1286 dated 9-4-82 u/s 4 and other mutation no. 1310 dated 27-3-83 u/s 8 of A.R. Act by misrepresentation and by making false statements.

8. Court below after hearing the parties accepted appeals and set aside both the mutations. Court below after relying on law enumerated in several judgments held that as both mutations have been attested in absence of appellant condoned the delay in filling appeals and set aside both mutations. Concluding Para of impugn

Click Here to Read the rest of this document