Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 193 (JK)

Nawab Bibi v. Custodian General J&K Govt. Jammu

2012-04-26

Sanjay Gupta

body2012
1. This revision petition has been directed against the order of Custodian General dt. 16.9.2006, by virtue of which he has held that, Custodian E.P. Jammu shall take appropriate steps to maintain the property and shall initiate proceedings for termination of manager-ship of petitioner Nawab Bibi, for bringing the property EP House no. 392 situated at Wazarat Road Jammu, under the direct management of E.P. Dept. 2. Petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the grounds that, order impugned is ultra virus to principle of natural justice, because no opportunity of being heard was given to her. 3. I have heard both the counsels at length and also gone through the pleading of petitioner and written arguments submitted by Custodian Department. 4. Brief facts emerging from the record is that house in question has been under manager ship of petitioner no.1 in pursuance to the order of Custodian general dt. 17.2.1997. The petitioner no.1 is under occupation of the house along with her sons. That there took place some dispute between petitioner no.1 and her son Mohd Rafiq, who is also residing in said house, with regard to different pathway and matter was taken before Custodian Evacuee Property Jammu. Mohd Rafiq intended to have separate entrance and for that purpose he started construction. The construction was got stopped by department and Deputy Custodian inspected the sight. A compromise was effected between the parties in presence of mohalla Bridari. 5. Accordingly Custodian passed an order on 16.1.05 and directed that, existing gate and pathway will be used by said Mohd Rafi exclusively and after demolishing the existing bath room, the other party shall construct a pathway for their own house. Custodian also observed in this order that, Mohd Anwar and other had started additional construction which was got stopped. 6. This order was passed 16.1.2006.Thereafter a revision was filed before Special Tribunal and 7.2.2006, this revision was transferred to Court below for adjudication. The Court below after hearing the parties passed the order on 16the Sep, 2006 which is impugned in this revision petition. The concluding Para is reads as under; During the course of proceedings, it was agitated that Nawab Bibi petitioner has been appointed as manager of E.P. house in question and she has unrestrained power to use the said Evacuee property. The concluding Para is reads as under; During the course of proceedings, it was agitated that Nawab Bibi petitioner has been appointed as manager of E.P. house in question and she has unrestrained power to use the said Evacuee property. The record revealed that the Manger ship was subject to certain conditions, more importantly that she will submit yearly accounts of incoming expenditure statements. The record revealed that the petitioner /manager has not submitted the income expenditure statements till date From records, it is also revealed that she has unauthorizedly started construction in premises under dispute which has been stopped by the department. By this order, the custodian Evacuee Property Jammu is directed to take appropriate steps to maintain the property in accordance with provision of J & K (Evacuee administration of property) act 2006. He shall initiate proceeding for termination of manegership and the bring the property on direct management of E.P dept. Order passed today the 16th of September 2006. Sd/ -- 7. Bare perusal of this order, it is evident that court below has directed custodian to take appropriate steps for maintaining the house in question and for initiating the proceeding for terminating the manager ship of petitioner Nawab Bibi on twin grounds. First ground is that manager Nawab Bibu has not submitted the income expenditure statements till date and secondly that she has unauthorizedly started construction in premises under dispute which has been stopped by the department. 8. Counsels for the petitioner while arguing the matter has stated that observation made by the Court below is not warranted,because nobody was having any case regarding these observations. He has further argued that submission of yearly accounts of income-expenditure statements is not applicable in the present case in term of Government Order No. A-653-50-50 dt. 6.5.1950. As per this Govt. order annual expenditure statement is applicable only to evacuee land and not to the house of Evacuee property. 9. I have given my thought full consideration to whole aspects of matter. From the perusal of file it reveals that order impugned in this petition has already been implemented and manger ship of Petitioner Nawab Bibi has been cancelled by custodian vide his order dt 14.1.07. In this order Petitioner has been allowed to remain in premises till she is alive. This order has been passed after issuing showcase notice on 13.11.2006. From the perusal of file it reveals that order impugned in this petition has already been implemented and manger ship of Petitioner Nawab Bibi has been cancelled by custodian vide his order dt 14.1.07. In this order Petitioner has been allowed to remain in premises till she is alive. This order has been passed after issuing showcase notice on 13.11.2006. Nwab bibi has also replied the show cause notice. 10. Petitioner has not challenged the order of custodian dt. 14.1.2007, which has subsequently passed, after order of custodian general on 16.9.06. It appears that, petitioner has cleverly drafted petition, as it has been prayed that all subsequently order to order dt.16.9.06 be set-aside. 11. It is not proper under law. When a party to a proceeding in appellant or Revisional court, participates in subsequent proceeding as per direction of appellant and Revisional court, then later on he cannot challenge the appellant or Revisional court order on grounds that,order was not proper. 12. In view of what has been discussed this revision petition is not maintainable. Petitioners have liberty to challenge order of custodian dt. 14.1.2007 before proper forum. This revision accordingly is dismissed. Record of court below is sent back along with order. 13. Present file be consigned to record after completion.