Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/2205/2023 of MOHAN LAL AND OTHERS Vs UT OF J AND K TH COMMISSIONER SECRETARY GOVT REVENUE DEPTT AND OTHERS on 27 July 2026
OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No. 2205/2023 CM No. 5101/2023 Mohan Lal and ors. …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Sachin Dogra, Advocate vs UT of J&K and ors. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Sagira Jaffer, Advocate vice Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 2205/2023
CM No. 5101/2023
Mohan Lal and ors.
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Sachin Dogra, Advocate
vs
UT of J&K and ors.
.…. Respondent(s)
Through: Ms. Sagira Jaffer, Advocate vice Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
27.07.2026
1. The petitioners have filed this petition for quashing order dated 01.06.2023 passed by respondent No. 5 in revision petition titled, ‘Mohan Lal & Ors. vs. Assistant Revenue Attorney & anr.’ and also order dated 26.08.2021 passed by respondent No. 2 in case titled ‘Assistant Revenue Attorney vs. State & Ors.’, whereby a composite appeal for cancellation of mutation No. 289 dated 11.10.1978 under LB 6/C and mutation No. 292 dated 23.11.2008 under S-432 with regard to land measuring 15 kanals in Survey No. 475/123 in Village Narsoo, District Udhampur, has been allowed by respondent No. 2 and the mutations have been cancelled ex-parte.
2. The record reveals that the petitioners being aggrieved of order dated 26.08.2021, preferred the revision petition before respondent No. 5 and respondent No. 5 in terms of order dated 01.06.2023, though entertained the revision petition but refused to grant ex-parte interim relief. This is precisely the order impugned by the petitioners. Serial No. 25
2 WP(C) No. 2205/2023
3. Objections have been filed by the respondents, thereby narrating the factual aspects of the case, which may not be relevant at this stage.
4. In terms of order dated 25.08.2023, the parties were directed to maintain status quo but the fact remains that in terms of order dated 01.06.2023, the revision petition preferred by the petitioners has not been finally decided by respondent No. 5.
5. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No. 5 to decide the revision petition preferred by the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order after affording due opportunity of hearing to all the interested parties and till the revision petition is finally decided by respondent No. 5, the order dated 25.08.2023 directing the parties to maintain status quo shall continue to remain in operation. The parties shall be at liberty to project their respective case by producing any relevant document before respondent No. 5.
6. Disposed of.
7. (RAJNESH OSWAL)
JUDGE
Jammu 27.07.2026 Neha-II
Whether the order is speaking:
Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable:
Yes/No NEHA KUMARI 2026.07.27 16:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document