Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Liyaqat Ali And Ors vs State & Ors on 15 March, 2019
Author: Rashid Ali Dar
Bench: Rashid Ali Dar
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR
AT JAMMU
OWP No.402/2019
IA No.1/2019
Date of order: 15.03.2019
Liyaqat Ali and ors vs State & ors
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rashid Ali Dar, Judge
Appearing counsel:
For petitioner/appellant (s) : Mr. L.K.Sharma, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Mohit Kumar, Advocate.
For respondent(s) :
Issue notice to the respondents, returnable within six weeks. Requisites steps within one week.
List on 03.05.2019.
IA No.1/2019In terms of the instant IA, the prayer is made for directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for attesting mutation in favour of the petitioners with respect to the land measuring 05 kanal 12 marlas comprising Khasra No.264 (old khasra No.332) situated at Channi Rama, Tehsil Bahu District Jammu in terms of Government Order No.LB-6C of 1958 dated 05.06.1958 and order No.432 of 1966 dated 03.06.1966.
The facts in brief as quoted in petition are:
(i) that one late Sh. Feroz Din and his father was in cultivating possession of State land measuring 05 kanal 12, marlas at Channi Rama Tehsil Bahu District Jammu on the basis of OWP No.402/2019 Page 1 of 4 galla batai prior to the year 1955 and after the death of Feroz Din, the said land is in uninterrupted possession of the petitioners being his heirs till date;
(ii) That in 1958, the State Government issued Order No. LB-
6/1958 dated 5th June 1958 in terms of which the occupants of State land who are found in cultivating possession in the year kharif 1957-58 had to be recorded as tenant-at-will under the State, subject to the conditions mentioned in the order and in the year 1966. The State Government issued thereafter another Order No.S-432 dated 3rd June 1966 and ordered that the proprietary rights be conferred on the cultivators of State land who have been declared as tenant-at- will in terms of Govt. Order No. LB-6/1958 dated 5th June 1958 subjects to conditions mentioned therein.
(iii) That though the father of the petitioners 1 to 4 was eligible to get the proprietary rights over the land in question under the above said orders, however in the meanwhile, another Govt. Order no. 453 of 1973 dated 29.09.1973 was issued whereby it was ordered that no mutation under Govt. Order No. LB- 6/1958 dated 5th June 1958 be attested henceforth, however subsequently vide Order No.163 dated 08.07.1986 issued by the State Govt., ban on the attestation of mutation was imposed vide order dated 29.09.1973 was rescinded and direction was issued to the revenue authorities to confer proprietary rights on the occupants of the State lands. The predecessor in interest of the petitioners, Late Sh. Feroz Din OWP No.402/2019 Page 2 of 4 could not process his case and died due to prolonged illness in the year 1973 and thereafter the petitioners 1 to 4 and Farman Ali, predecessor in interest of petitioners 5 to 7 approached the revenue authorities for attestation of mutation but the same was not attested even though he was eligible and entitled for the attestation of mutation and thereafter the State Govt. again vide Govt. Order dated 22.06.1989 ordered that no mutation under Govt. Order No. LB-6/1958 dated 5th June 1958 and S-432 of 1966 dated 03.06.1966 shall be attested henceforth in respect of the land to which said orders were applicable and a ban was imposed by the Govt. on attestation of mutation in favor of occupants of the State land.
(iv) That in the year 2005, the Division Bench of this Court in case titled Kewal Krishan vs State of J&K & ors quashed the Govt. Order No. 158 of 1989 imposing ban on attestation of mutation in favor of occupants of State land under Govt. Order Nos. LB-6/1958 and 432 of 1966 and pursuant to the quashment of the Order No. 158 of 1989 imposing ban on attestation of mutation in favor of occupants of State land by the this Court, the Govt. vide Order no. LB (201) of 2007 dated 12.06.2007 ordered that proprietary rights be conferred on the cultivators of the State land in terms of Govt. Order No. LB-6/1958 and 432 of 1966.
(v) That the father of the petitioners 1 to 4, father-in-law of respondent no.5 and grandfather of the petitioners 6 & 7, OWP No.402/2019 Page 3 of 4 namely Late Sh. Feroz Din died in the year 1973 leaving the petitioners 1 to 4 and Farman Ali as his legal heirs entitled to inherit his estate and in the year 2017, Farman Ali also died leaving the petitioners 5 to 7 as his legal heirs who have stepped into his shoes. The petitioners have approached the revenue authorities repeatedly to attest the mutation in favour of the petitioners in terms of the Govt. Order No. LB-6/1958 and 432 of 1966 but the case of the petitioners has not been considered so far.
It is being submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that in view of the directions already passed in various cases (of which reference has been given as OWP No.292/1993 and in OWP No.1322/2017 etc) by the Coordinate Benchs of this Court a direction can be given to the respondents to give similar treatment to the petitioners as has been done in other similarly situated cases with regard to regularization of their possession and conferring of the proprietary rights in terms of the Govt. Order No.LB-6C of 1958 dated 05.06.1958 and order No.432 of 1966 dated 03.06.1966.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the instant WP/IA can be disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners accordingly made in the instant application.
Having regard to the submissions in the main petition and prayer made in the instant IA, the same is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization of their possession and conferment of proprietary rights in favour of the petitioners in terms of the Government Order No. LB-6/C of 1958 and Government Order No.S-432 of 1966 dated 30.06.1966 and directions given in judgments (supra) under OWP No.402/2019 Page 4 of 4 rules (within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today).
Report be accordingly submitted in this Court after consideration of the matter on the next date of hearing. The petitioners be also informed about the exercise to be initiated regarding consideration to be given to the petitioners and if necessary they be associated with the exercise to be initiated.
Modification/alteration on motion.
IA is disposed of.
(Rashid Ali Dar) Judge Jammu:
15.03.2019 Vijay VIJAY KUMAR 2019.03.22 13:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document OWP No.402/2019 Page 5 of 4