Serial No. 100 Supplementary-1 Cause List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP (C) No. 508/2024 CM No. 4901/2024 CM No. 1367/2024 Abdul Rehman Sheikh and Anr. … Petitioner(s) Through: - Mr Abdul Musavir Tak, Advocate. V/s Union Territory of J&K and Ors. … Respondent(s) Through: - Mr Mohammad Ayoub Bhat, Advocate; Ms Mehjabeen Bhat, Advocate. CORAM: Hon’ble Mr Justice Rahul Bharti, Judge. (ORDER) 10.03.2025 01. A purported mutation of inheritance No. 2002 dated 10th of December, 2018 with respect to the estate of one Mst. Rehti thereby, allegedly settling succession in favour of sons to the exclusion of daughters of estate holder Mst. Rehti, came to be attested by the mutation attesting officer of the tehsil Shopian. 02. The estate forming subject matter of said mutation comprised in mouza Batpora, Shopian by reference to khewat No. 86/305 and 134/422. 03. One of the daughters of the estate holder-Mst Hajira/ the respondent No.5 herein, felt aggrieved of the attestation of said mutation No. 2002 of 2018 and, therefore, came to submit an appeal on file No. 2122 on 5th of April, 2021 before the appellate court of Additional Deputy Commissioner (Collector), Shopian. 04. Said appeal of the respondent No.5-Mst. Hajira came to be held time barred and condonation of delay was not extended in favour of the respondent No.5-Mst. Hajira. Appeal, thus, came to be disposed of in terms of an order dated 6th of March, 2023 against which the petitioners resorted to revisional jurisdiction before the Additional Commissioner (Divisional Commissioner), Kashmir on file No. Rev-09 on 7th of April, 2023 which resulted in a reference to the Financial Commissioner, Revenue, J&K in terms of an order dated 7th of January, 2023. 05. The Financial Commissioner (Revenue), J&K came to accept the said reference by virtue of an order dated 21st of February, 2024, whereby the appeal of the respondent No.4-Mst. Hajira not only came to be allowed but also the impugned mutation set aside. 06. This exercise of revisional jurisdiction by the Financial Commissioner (Revenue), J&K has come to be questioned by the petitioners, who are sons of Mst. Rehti, the beneficiaries of said mutation No. 2002 of 2018. 07. From a bare perusal of the reference order as well as final order of the Financial Commissioner (Revenue), J&K, it can be said that the only outcome which was available at the disposal of the revisional authority only was to set aside the order of the appellate authority of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shopian insofar as the order did not allow condoning of delay in favour of respondent No.5-Mst. Hajira to maintain the appeal and thereafter leaving the adjudication of appeal on merits to be carried out by the appellate authority of Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shopian on the basis of fullness of facts and circumstances, as pleaded in the memo of appeal by the Respondent No.5-Mst. Hajira. 08. Any outcome of the adjudication of the appeal on merits would have afforded a legitimate right of appeal or, for that matter, revision to an aggrieved party but that aspect got skipped over by the indulgence of the Financial Commissioner (Revenue), J&K, Srinagar, which has set in a prejudice to the petitioners that perhaps they being the contesting respondents in the time barred appeal were left non-suited. 09. The Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shopian in denying condonation of delay in favour of appellant-Mst. Hajira/ respondent No.5 herein ought not to have stretched himself further to say that the appeal is being dismissed as the appeal, at no time, was ever entertained to be on the docket of the appellate authority. 10. There is, thus, a legal deficiency obtaining in the adjudication made by the learned Financial Commissioner (Revenue), J&K in ordering the setting aside of the impugned mutation which was under challenge in the appeal. The learned Financial Commissioner (Revenue), J&K was right in setting aside the order dated 21st of February, 2023 of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shopian insofar as it refused condonation of delay and, therefore, this Court holds that the appeal filed by the respondent No.5-Mst. Hajira on file No. 2122 of 2021 is to be entertained by the appellate authority on account of setting aside of order dated 21st of February, 2023 refusing condonation of delay and the appeal be heard on merits by affording right of hearing to both parties. 11. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of in the light of the aforesaid, along with connected CM(s). 12. Parties to appear before the appellate authority of Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shopian on 7th of April, 2025. (Rahul Bharti) Judge SRINAGAR March 10th, 2025 “TAHIR” Tahir Manzoor Bhat I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document