IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR & LADAKH

AT JAMMU
WP(C) No.592/2023
CM No. 1390/2023.

Sheraz Ahmed V/S U.T of J&K & Ors

Petitioner Respondent
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Objections on behalf of respondent No. 03 to 06.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR:-

The respondent No. 03 to 06 most respectfully submits as under:-

1. That present writ petition has been filed by suppressing

material facts hence this petition deserves to be dismissed out
rightly.
2. That present petition is not maintainable as petitioner has
equally efficacious remedy available under the land revenue
Act which has not been availed by him in absence whereof
resort to writ petition without availing the alternative remedy
under the land revenue act deserves to be dismissed.
3. That answering respondents are in a physical cultivation land
under khasra no 282 measuring 9 kanals situate at Village
Nakka Manjhari. The answering respondents through their
forefathers are in occupation of the land measuring 9 kanals
over which they have constructed their residential houses. The
said land was included in Maqsoos khacharai (land reserved
for grazing purposes) which order was challenged by the
father of answering respondent with Fazal Mohammad S/o
Halaf Din by filing an appeal against mutation no 54 attested
on 26-04-1976. The said appeal was heard by the Deputy
Commissioner/collector Poonch in case mutation No. 54 dated
 26-04-1976 and in terms of judgement dated 16-06-1993 the
appeal was accepted and inclusion of 9 kanals of land as was
in the physical possession of the father of the answering
respondent prior to khariff 1957 was set aside maintaining the
possession, rights and title of the father of answering
respondent over 9 kanas of land. The said decision of Deputy
Commissioner as given on 16-06-1993 attained finality. In
absence of any challenge, the prayer of the petitioner to evict
answering respondent from land measuring 9 kanals under
survey no 486/229 deserves to be rejected. Copy of the order
dated 16-06-1993 as passed by Deputy
Commissioner/Collector Poonch in enclosed herewith and
marked as ANNEXURE-RI.
4. That the Deputy Commissioner Poonch while accepting an
appeal has returned a definite finding to the effect that the land
has been given to the forefathers answering respondent for
cultivation purposes and are in continuous possession since
1942 and their cultivation is recorded since 1957. In the
settlement of 1961-62, 9 kanals of land was separately
measured and kept out of the grazing field. It is also recorded
in the said judgment that the appellant obtained the said land
by way of nautaur from the maharaja of Poonch and his
personal cultivation is recorded since 1957. The said decision
of Deputy Commissioner was fully known to the present
petitioner and his predecessor in interest hence the writ
petition in these circumstances deserves to be dismissed.
5. That a dispute has risen in this writ petition was also raised by
the father of answering respondent against the father of
petitioner before collector agrarian reforms Mendhar. The said
collector heard the matter between the parties and finally
restrained the father of petitioner Mumtaz Hussain, Haq
 Nawaz S/o Hidayatullah and Hidayatulla S/o Farman Ali in
terms of judgment dated 01-10-1994. Copy of the summary of
order as passed by Collector Agrarian Reforms Mendhar
reflecting this position is enclosed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE-RII. As the predecessor of the petitioner
accepting this position for the last over more than 30 years,
the present petition at this stage suppressing all these acts
deserves to be dismissed.
6. That answering respondents have a settled possession on 9
kanas 1 marlas of land under survey no 282 situate at village
Nakka Manjhari and have raised their residential houses. As
they were conferred ownership rights in terms of mutation of
12-10-1993 which is fully known to the petitioner as well hence
in absence of any challenge to mutation No. 689 dated 12-10-
1993, this petition is liable to be dismissed.

Without prejudice to the foregoing preliminary

objections, parawise reply is submitted as under:-

1. That contents of para 1 are admitted, it is however denied that

any of the fundamental or statutory rights of the petitioner has

been violated.

2. That in reply to para 2, it is submitted that answering

respondents have been coffered ownership rights back in

1993 and they have constructed their residential houses over

the said land. Respondents have not encroached any land as

alleged but they have been conferred ownership rights in

view of their possession through their ancestors since 1942,

the circular referred to by the petitioner is not applicable in

 their case hence the contention of petitioner is incorrect and

same deserves to be rejected.

3. That contens of para 3 are incorrect and denied.

4. In reply to para 4 it is submitted that the said mutation no. 689

has been correctly attested hence the plea of petitioner is

incorrect and denied.

5. In reply to para 5 it is submitted that the big junk of land is

recorded as reserved for grazing purposes however the parcel

of 9 kalas 1 marals of land was wrongly included in the said

land which was subsequently set aside by DC Poonch in an

appeal filed by the father of respondents herein.

6. That contents of para 6 are incorrect and denied.

7. That contents of para 7 are incorrect and denied.

8. That in reply to para 8 it is submitted that the said land is in

possession of the respondents through their forefathers since

1942 and it has been rightly devolved upon them under law of

succession.

9. That contents of para 9 are denied.

10. That in reply to para 10 petitioner has suppressed facts

and has tried to mislead the honble court, his father,

grandfather and his uncle were party before Collector

Agrarian Reforms Mendhar in a litigation about the said land

in 1993 and thereafter accepted the position without any

 recourse against the said judgment. It is factually incorrect

that the respondents raised four walls over the land in 2022

and fact of the matter is respondents have their residential

houses over the said piece of land and being agriculturists are

putting up in small parcels of land with the enlargement of

their families. It is submitted that petitioner wants to damage

the houses of the answering respondents which attempt was

defeated and as a measure of vengeance has filed this

petition on false fronts.

11. That contents of para 11 are incorrect and denied.

12. That contents of para 12 are incorrect and denied. It is

submitted that petitioner can obtain the copy under law from

the concerned authorities.

13. In reply to para 13 14 15 it is submitted that the said

circular is mot applicable in the case of answering

respondents hence deserves to be dismissed.

14. In reply to para 16 it is submitted that during pendency of

such representation, the present petition deserves to be

dismissed.

15. That contents of ground 17 and those of grounds are

replied as under – That in reply to ground (a) to (i), it is

submitted that mutation has been rightly attested in 1993

which position has been accepted by the petitioner and

 predecessor interested. The circular is not applicable. It is

submitted that all the occupant of state land prior to khariff

1957 were conferred ownership rights in terms of order no LB-

6- of 1957-58 and S-432 of 1962. The father of answering

respondent agitated the matter before Collector Poonch for

conferment of rights who admitted his claim allowing the sale

against the mutation order of Tehsildar Mendhar illegally

including the present parcel of land in village grazing land, the

order of Deputy Commissioner has attained finality and in

absence of any challenge to the said order before the forum at

any time this petition deserves to be dismissed.

16. That contents of para 18, 19 and 20 are denied.

17. Last para by way of prayed is denied

An affidavit in support is enclosed herewith.

IN THE PREMISES-

It is therefore most humbly prayed that in view of the position

explained above, the present petition may kindly be dismissed with
heavy costs.

RESPONDENT NO 03 to 06
THROUGH COUNSEL

H.A SIDDIQUI
ADVOCATE
HIGH COURT OF J AND K & LADAKH
AT JAMMU
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR & LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No.592/2023
CM No. 1390/2023.

Sheraz Ahmed V/S U.T of J&K & Ors

Petitioner Respondent
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Affidavit in support of Objections.

I, Zabir Hussain Age 50 years S/o Fazal Mohd R/o Naka Manjhari
Tehsil Mendhar Distt Poonch, do hereby solemnly affirm and
declare as under -
1. That the accompanying objections have been read over and
explained to me and the contents of objection are true and
correct as per my knowledge and as per information received
from record and legal advice.
2. The deponent is respondent No. 03 in the above titled writ
petition, he is well versed with the facts and circumstances of
the case, and hence he is competent to swear the instant
affidavit.
3. That I have been duly authorized to swear this affidavit on my
behalf as well as on behalf of respondent No 3, 5 and 6.

I solemnly swear/affirm that the affidavit is true, no part of this

is false and nothing has been concealed.

Place: Jammu
Dated:

DEPONENT
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR & LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No.592/2023
CM No. 1390/2023.

Sheraz Ahmed V/S U.T of J&K & Ors

Petitioner Respondent
IN THE MATTER OF: -

INDEX

S No. Particulars Page No.

1. Objections along with affidavit
2. ANNEXURE-R1
(Copy of the order dated 16-06-1993 as
passed by Deputy Commissioner/Collector
Poonch)
3. ANNEXURE-R2
(Copy of the summary of order as passed by
Collector Agrarian Reforms Mendhar)
4. VAKALATNAMA

Filed by:-

RESPONDENT NO 03-06
THROUGH COUNSEL
Dated:
Place:Jammu. H.A.Siddiqui
Advocate

SHAMAS-UD-DIN SHAAZ
ADVOCATE