Serial No. 136 Suppl. Cause List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 848/2026 Asadullah Hajam (84 Years) S/O Lala Hajam R/O Hakermullah Budgam, Tehsil/Distt. Budgam. ...Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: - Mr. Aasif Iqbal, Advocate. V/s 1. Union Territory of J&K through Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Civil Secretariat Srinagar/Jammu. 2. Deputy Commissioner/District Collector Budgam. 3. Assistant Commissioner (Revenue) Budgam. 4. Tehsildar Budgam. … Respondent(s) Through:- None. CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE M. A. CHOWDHARY, JUDGE. (ORDER) 24.04.2026 01. Petitioner, claiming to be the owner in possession, along with other legal heirs, of the land measuring 59 Kanals 15 Marlas, falling under Khasra No. 65 (old), out of which petitioner was entitled to a share of 29 Kanals and 17 Marlas, asserts that in the year 2008-09 a settlement operation was carried out and old survey numbers were replaced by new ones; that the petitioner’s old survey number (65) was also carved out into new ones. However, unfortunately a discrepancy occurred as the land shown in the new survey numbers was shown deficient by 7 Kanals and 10 Marlas, as instead of showing 59 Kanals and 15 Marlas of land holding, the new numbers only showed 52 Kanals and 5 Marlas of land. As a result the petitioner who was shareholder of 29 Kanals and 17 Marlas of land was shown in the new settlement as shareholder of 23 Kanal and 15 Marlas only, therefore his land holding was shown deficient by 6 Kanals and 2 Marlas. 02. That immediately after coming into knowledge of the discrepancy, the petitioner approached the office of the Assistant Commissioner (Revenue) Budgam, with an application in the year 2019, indicating the whole facts along with the revenue records old as well as the new ones showing the deficiency of land holding of the petitioner in the newly generated survey numbers. 03. Accordingly, the petitioner was directed to apply for issuance of Fard-E-Badr, and accordingly he applied for the same in the year 2023, however, it was alleged that the respondents have neither corrected nor issued the Fard-E-Badr in his favour. 04. The petitioner, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts has prayed for following reliefs: i. A Writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus be issued commanding the respondent to decide and finalize the case of the petitioner for rectification of Record of Rights of estate Hekermullah Budgam within time frame and to carry out necessary corrects in favour of the petitioner in the Record of Rights as per the report of the field agencies and as per the mandate of law. ii. A writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus be issued commanding the respondents to issue Fard-E- Badr in favour of the petitioner to the extent of deficiency of his share of 6 Kanal and 2 Marlas strictly in accordance with the law governing the field without any further delay. 05. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall be satisfied, if this case is disposed of at this motion stage with a direction to the respondents to consider the plea raised in this petition by the petitioner, expeditiously, within a time frame. 06. In view of the limited controversy and the submissions urged at the bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the plea raised by the petitioner in this petition expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of this order. 07. Disposed of, along with all pending application(s). (M. A. CHOWDHARY) JUDGE SRINAGAR April 24th, 2026 <Shoaib javid=