The appellate authority under the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 cannot exceed its jurisdiction by remanding matters to lower authorities without proper legal basis.

Headnote:(A) Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 - Sections 21 and 19 - Appeal against khasra girdawari entries - The appellate authority incorrectly assumed the role of the original authority, violating the procedural requirements set forth in the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 and related government orders. The appeal was dismissed as not maintainable. (Paras 9, 10, 16, 17)

(B) Jurisdiction - The appellate authority must operate within the confines of its jurisdiction as defined by the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976, and cannot act as a reviewing authority for entries made years prior without proper legal basis. (Paras 9, 15)

Facts of the case:
The appeal was filed by the legal representatives of Ghulab Nabi against the 1971 khasra girdawari entries, which recorded the land as an orchard. The Additional Deputy Commissioner remanded the matter for correction, which was contested by the appellants.

Findings of Court:
The order of the Additional Deputy Commissioner was set aside, and the original khasra girdawari entries were restored, affirming that the appeal was not maintainable as per the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976.

Issues: The main issues included the maintainability of the appeal and the jurisdiction of the appellate authority under the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellate authority exceeded its jurisdiction by remanding the matter to a Tehsildar, which was not permitted under the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976.

Result: The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was dismissed.

ORDER :

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The respondents No. 4 to 10 are the successors-in-interest (legal representatives) of one Ghulab Nabi, S/o Abdullah. Said Ghulab Nabi joined by the respondent No. 11-Kulsum Begam and the respondent No. 12-Rashid Ahmed came to file an appeal under the provisions of the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 assailing khasra girdawari entries of kharif 1971 with respect to land measuring 7.8 kanals in khasra No. 261 of village Chakka, tehsil Bhaderwah, district Doda recording the nature of land to be an orchard. In the said appeal, the petitioner herein figured as a sole respondent.

3. The appeal was originally submitted before the Additional Deputy Commissioner (with the Powers of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms), Doda on file No. 893/CARD dated 23.07.2009 but later on, it came to be transferred to the Additional Deputy Commissioner (with the Powers of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms), Bhaderwah on file No. 12/RA bearing date of institution 18.01.2019.

4. Said appeal came to be decided by the Additional Deputy Commissioner (with the Powers of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms), Bhaderwah by virtue of an order dated 04.08.2022.

5. The appellate authority of the Additional Deputy Commissioner (with the Powers of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms), Bhaderwah came up with a purported finding that there was obtaining no orchard to be recorded as such in 1971 khasra girdawari record and that the petitioner herein, as respondent in the appeal, had neither acquired any personal cultivation nor adopted any residence in the village for the purpose of seeking resumption of the land under section 7 of the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 whereas father of the appellant No. 1-Ghulam Nabi was entered as a protected tenant qua the land in reference from the year 1961 to 1968 who was continuously cultivating the land in reference on spot.

6. Thus, the appellate authority of the Additional Deputy Commissioner (with the Powers of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms), Bhaderwah literally censured the 1971 khasra girdawari entry which came to be questioned by the appellants obtaining in favour of the respondent/petitioner herein and remanded the matter to the Tehsildar Bhaderwah for correction of the girdawari after verifying the record and to proceed under the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976.Thus, the entry challenged in the appeal by three appellants came to be upset and matter remanded.

7. In the memo of appeal, it came to be pleaded that the entry in favour of the petitioner with respect to 1971 was manipulated at the back of the appellants and, therefore there was no bar of limitation with respect to the right of the appellants to come in the appeal against the khasra girdawari entry.

8. Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 when it provides an appellate remedy under section 21, then it means that an appeal is to be preferred against an order passed on the original side proceedings under the regime of Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 by the agrarian reforms authorities/officials constituted under the very said Act.

9. In the present case, there was no such order be it by a Collector or a Revenue Officer of a class more than that of a Collector so as to give right to appeal in favour of the said three appellants to approach the Commissioner Agrarian Reforms with an appeal under section 21(1) of the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 and this aspect was least bothered to be checked by the Additional Deputy Commissioner (with the Powers of Commissioner Agrarian Reforms), Bhaderwah who literally acted as a reviewing/revisional authority with respect to the 1971 entry its validity and legality. If such like review authority is to be conceded to an appellate authority under the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 then that would mean that at any given point of time and for all times to come so long as the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 stays on statute book then any person aggrieved by an entry of 1971 can find door open for coming up with an appeal in terms of section 21(1) of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document