Back
JAVED IQBAL WANI
Ama Teli – Appellant
Versus
Manzoor Ahmad Bhat – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioner in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution has called in question order passed by the Financial Commissioner (Revenue)/Commissioner Agrarian Reforms dated 15.5.2019 in appeal titled as “Manzoor Ahmad Bhat and others versus Ama Teli” and order dated 11.6.2019 passed by J&K Special Tribunal in revision petition titled as “Ama Teli versus Manzoor Ahmad Bhat and others”.
2. The genesis of the controversy involved in the writ petition is traceable to Mutation (Sehti Kasht) No. 2369 dated 15.6.1982, Mutation No. 2370 dated 15.6.1982 and Mutation No. 2511 dated 15.9.1983 attested under Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 in favour of the petitioner herein.
3. The respondents herein aggrieved of the aforesaid Mutations filed a time-barred appeal on 19.5.2015 before the appellate forum on the premise that their father passed away on 26.3.1977 and the land covered under the impugned Mutations remained under their personal cultivation and that the father of the petitioner herein was being hired as a labourer in lieu of cash for cultivating and supervising the land in question without there being any relationship of landlord and tiller and that upon the d
The central legal point established in the judgment is the breach of provisions of the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 in attesting Mutations and the requirement for a denovo enquiry.
The High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 is discretionary and should not be exercised where an alternative remedy exists, especially in cases involving disputed facts.
A petitioner cannot pursue a new writ petition regarding land already contested in previous legal actions, emphasizing the need for resolution of prior matters.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that belated appeals without sufficient cause can be rejected, and the jurisdiction of the Tribunal in exercising revisional power is limited.
The court emphasized that findings based on incorrect co-sharer status and unjustified delay in appeals led to a miscarriage of justice, allowing the appeal and setting aside previous orders.
The court emphasized the importance of condoning delay in filing appeals and upheld the decision to set aside mutations based on fraud.
Writ court cannot question validity of unchallenged final prior mutations on tenancy surrender while reviewing tribunal order upholding them against later agrarian reform conferment.
The finality of mutations under the Agrarian Reforms Act, the requirement to challenge the attestation of mutations, and the invalidity of creating tenancy after May 1973 as per section 13 of the Act....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
