S. No. 15 Regular Cause List IN THE HIGH C0URT 0F JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 1734/2024 CM (4669/2024) CM (4670/2024) RIYAZ AHMAD AKHOON AND ANR. …Appellant/Petitioner(s) Through: None Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SRINAGAR AND ORS. ...Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Saima Mehboob, Adv. for Rs. 3 to 12 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE ORDER 30.05.2025 1. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondents submits that with the efflux of time, the instant petition has been rendered infructuous. However, the record reveals that this court vide order dated 05.08.2024 has already stayed the implementation of the impugned judgment passed in revision petition titled as “Mst. Mehbooba & Anr. Vs. Riyaz Ahmad Akhoon & Ors.” by the Financial Commissioner (Revenue) J&K, Srinagar vide order dated 05.09.2017. 2. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondents fairly submits that prior to the passing of the restraint order by this court dated 05.08.2024, the judgment had already been implemented on 03.08.2024 and pursuant thereto even the mutation also stands attested on 03.08.2024 which has already been placed on record as Annexure-v with the objections filed on behalf of the private respondents. Thus, according to the learned counsel the instant petition has been rendered infructuous and prays that the instant petition be dismissed. 3. Since the mutation has already been attested pursuant to the order passed by the learned Financial Commissioner, which is impugned in the present petition, thus, the petitioner in case of any grievance will have a fresh cause of action to challenge the same in case he is aggrieved and the instant petition accordingly with the efflux of time and with the change in circumstances has been rendered infructuous and this is the precise reason that there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. 4. In light of the statement made by the learned counsel for respondents and also the stand taken by the respondents in the objections so filed, the writ petition having rendered infructuous and is dismissed. However, this will not come in the way of the petitioner to file a fresh petition on the accrual of the fresh cause of action, if so advised. 5. Dismissed as having rendered infructuous. 6. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated. (WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE SRINAGAR 30.05.2025 Sakeena