Serial No. 01 SUPP. LIST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR RP No. 24/2024 Hamid Ullah Qazi …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Rizwan-ul-Zaman, Advocate Vs. Financial Commissioner and others ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Faheem Nisar Shah, GA for 1 to 4 Mr. T.M. Shamsi, DSGI with Ms. Rehana Qayoom, Adv. for 5 & 6 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE ORDE R 25.04.2025 1. Through the medium of this petition, the petitioner seeks review of the judgment dated 8th May, 2024, passed in OWP No. 262/2019, on the ground that although the judgment dated 8th May, 2024, is in favour of the petitioner, yet one of the prayers made by the petitioner in the writ petition with respect to directions to the respondents to release the unpaid rent in his favour has not been considered. 2. Upon being put on notice, Mr. Faheem Nisar Shah, learned GA, has entered appearance on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 and Mr. T.M. Shamsi, learned DSGI, on behalf of respondents 5 & 6. However, the respondents have chosen not to file any objections. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 4. It is seen that in OWP No. 262/2019, which was disposed of by this Court in terms of judgment under review, the petitioner had, inter alia, prayed for a direction to the respondents 5 & 6 to release the withheld rent in favour of the petitioner in respect of land measuring 16 kanals and 5 marlas, under survey No. 132 of village Ujroo/Shamispora, Tehsil Dooru, which was and continues to be in possession of the respondents 5 & 6. Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 29.04.2025 5. It is true that with the grant of first two prayers in the writ petition and setting aside the impugned orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner Revenue, J&K, dated 28th April, 2014, and the Financial Commissioner Revenue, Jammu & Kashmir, Srinagar, dated 7th June, 2017, the mutation No. 159 of 1988 attested by the Tehsildar Dooru, came to be revived. As per mutation No. 159 of 1988, the petitioner is owner and, therefore, entitled to rental compensation from the respondents 5 & 6. 6. For the foregoing reasons the judgment dated 8th May, 2024, to the extent aforesaid is recalled and a direction is issued to the Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag, to release the unpaid rental compensation in favour of the recorded owner. This order shall be read in continuation and modification of judgment dated 8th May, 2024 (supra). 7. Disposed of. (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE SRINAGAR: 25.04.2025 “ARIF” Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 29.04.2025