Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 94 (JK)

Jagjit Rai v. State of J&K

2025-03-05

RAJNESH OSWAL

body2025
ORDER : 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for quashing order dated1877-OQ dated 06.09.2022 issued by the Tehsildar Jammu, whereby the Patwari Halqa Domana has been directed to initiate proceedings under section 13 of the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 qua the residential house belonging to the petitioner and present the same before him for attestation. 2. The order has been impugned primarily on the ground that the respondent No. 4 has acted without jurisdiction because in terms of provisions of the section 19(3) of the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 read with Rule 57 of the Agrarian Reforms Rules 1977, the powers and jurisdiction is vested in the Collector under the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 to conduct enquiry and the Tehsildar Jammu respondent No. 4 herein is not a Collector within the meaning of the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976. 3. The respondents have filed the response stating therein that after verifying the mutation register of Village Raipur Domana, it is found that the mutation No. 2469 under section 13 of the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 has been found entered but the said mutation has not been attested till date as no proceedings under section 13 of the Agrarian Reforms Act has been found implemented in the revenue record. It is also averred that the aforesaid proceedings were initiated during the tenure of Subash Singh Chib, the then Tehsildar Jammu. Since the Village Raipur Domana is now a part of Tehsil Jammu North and Tehsil Jammu North has been carved out of erstwhile Tehsil Jammu in the year, 2014 and as per the report of Naib Tehsildar Mishriwala and revenue field staff, no proceedings under section 13 of the Agrarian Reforms Act have been finalized by the then Tehsildar, Jammu for which the petitioner is seeking the relief and subsequent quashing of the proceedings. It is further admitted by the respondents in the response that in terms of section 13 of the Agrarian Reforms Act and Rule 57 of the Agrarian Reforms Rules, proceedings under section 13 of the Agrarian Reforms Act lie only with the Collector, Agrarian Reforms. 4. Heard and perused the record. 5. It is further admitted by the respondents in the response that in terms of section 13 of the Agrarian Reforms Act and Rule 57 of the Agrarian Reforms Rules, proceedings under section 13 of the Agrarian Reforms Act lie only with the Collector, Agrarian Reforms. 4. Heard and perused the record. 5. In view of the categoric admission by the respondents that the jurisdiction under section 13 of the Agrarian Reforms Act vests with the Collector Agrarian Reforms only as such, order bearing No. 1877-OQ, dated 06.09.2011 passed by the Tehsildar Jammu is quashed, as having been passed without jurisdiction because he was not Collector within the meaning of the Agrarian Reforms Act. 6. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has not pressed the other reliefs as sought in the present writ petition. 7. Disposed of.