HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No. 308/2022 CM No. 1159/2022 Tulsi Ram and ors. …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. S. M. Chowdhary, Advocate vs UT of J&K and ors. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG with Ms. Priyanka Bhat, Advocate Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE ORDER 05.02.2025 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners for quashing order No. DCS/SQ/1769-70 dated 07.11.2007 passed by respondent No. 2, by virtue of which, respondent No. 2 has allegedly, wrongly as well as illegally and contrary to the provisions of the J&K State Lands (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act 2001, conferred ownership rights in favour of the petitioners qua the land measuring 19 Kanal 05 Marla falling under Khasra No. 275 min (old), 249 (new), which was allotted to the deceased father of the petitioners, namely, Jethu under Govt. Order No. LB/7-C of 1958 dated 05.06.1958 situated at Village Maheen Sarkar erstwhile Tehsil Samba, District Jammu, at present, Tehsil Bari Brahmana District Samba. Further prayer has also been made for quashing the mutation No. 397 dated 23.07.2009 attested by respondent No. 3 in favour of the petitioners pursuant to order No. DSC/SQ/1769-70 dated 07.11.2007 passed by Serial No. 13 2 WP(C) No. 308/2022 respondent No. 2. Further prayer has been made for directing respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to attest the mutation and confer ownership rights in favour of the petitioners under Govt. Order No. LB/7-C of 1958. 2. It is contended that the land mentioned above was allotted in favour of the father of the petitioners under Govt. Order No. LB/7-C of 1958 and the same did not fall within the purview of the J&K State Lands (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act 2001 (For short ‘the Act of 2001’) but despite that the ownership was conferred upon the petitioners under the Act of 2001, when the respondents compelled the petitioners to apply for conferring the ownership rights over their land under the Act of 2001. 3. The respondents have filed the response stating therein that the petitioners were not directed by any person to submit any claim form and have never warned any person of action under law in case, he fails to apply or submit his claim under the Act of 2001 and also no notice was issued to the petitioners for filing a claim under the Act of 2001. The respondents have further stated that the petitioners in fact themselves were not aware of allotment of the land under Govt. Order No. LB/7-C of 1958 dated 05.06.1958 and it was only when the petitioners applied for regularization of their occupation over the State land, the benefit of the Act was granted to them. It is further averred that the petitioners have approached this Court only after the Act of 2001 was declared ‘ultra vires’ and the directions were issued by the Division Bench of this Court to retrieve the State land. 3 WP(C) No. 308/2022 4. Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record. 5. It appears that the petitioners have filed this writ petition only after the Division Bench of this Court declared the Act of 2001 ‘ultra vires’ and apprehending their dispossession from the land allegedly claimed to have been allotted to their deceased father under the Govt. Order No. LB/7-C of 1958, the petitioners have filed this writ petition. It is contended by the petitioners that they had never approached the respondents for grant of benefit under the Act of 2001 but it was only when they were impressed upon by the official respondents to get the ownership of the land mentioned above, that the petitioners applied for grant of ownership rights under the Act of 2001. 6. Be that as it may, once the Act of 2001 has been declared ‘ultra vires’, as such, all the orders conferring ownership pursuant to the Act of 2001 and consequent mutations attested thereafter, have lost their validity except in cases where the affected persons had approached the Division Bench of this Court seeking review of the judgment and protection has been granted by the Division Bench of this Court. The contention of the petitioners is that their deceased father was allottee under Govt. Order No. LB/7-C of 1958, as such, the respondents are under obligation to confer ownership rights to the petitioners in terms of Govt. Order No. Rev (LB) 202 of 2007. 7. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of by declaring that order No. DCS/SQ/1769-70 dated 07.11.2007 and mutation No. 397 dated 23.07.2009 are nonest in the eyes of law and the respondent No. 2 is directed to consider the claim of the petitioners for grant of 4 WP(C) No. 308/2022 ownership under Govt. Order No. Rev (LB) 202 of 2007 dated 12.06.2007, if the case of the petitioners is squarely covered under the said Govt. Order. Needless to say that this Court has not expressed any opinion in respect of the merits of the claim of the petitioners for grant of benefit under the Govt. Order mentioned above. Till the claim of the petitioners is considered by the respondent No. 2, their possession shall not be disturbed. 8. Disposed of. (RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE Jammu 05.02.2025 Neha-II Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No NEHA KUMARI 2025.02.06 16:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document