Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/1616/2026 of ABDUL SUBHAN ZARGAR Vs ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER WITH DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER KASHMIR AND OTHERS on 14 July 2026
No. 132 SUPPLEMENTARY CAUSE LIST-1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) No. 1616/2026 CM No. 4226/2026 Abdul Subhan Zargar …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Waseem Shamus, Advocate Vs. Additional Commissioner with Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir and Others.
Serial No. 132
SUPPLEMENTARY CAUSE LIST-1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) No. 1616/2026
CM No. 4226/2026
Abdul Subhan Zargar
…Petitioner(s)
Through:
Mr. Waseem Shamus, Advocate
Vs.
Additional Commissioner with
Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir
and Others.
...Respondent(s)
Through:
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, 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
14.07.2026
1. The petitioner still has an option of efficacious and alternate remedy of preferring a revision under J&K Land Revenue Act-Samvat, 1996 before the Financial Commissioner, (Revenue), J&K against the impugned order dated 26.05.2026 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir on File No.Rev-268 of 13.12.2025 read with order dated 03.10.2025 on File No.LRA/260/2021.
2. The petitioner was the holder of mutation No. 729 dated 29.09.2001 with respect to land comprising khasra No. 586-588-min of village Kachwa- Muqam Tehsil Wagoora District, Baramulla which admittedly was of ownership of the respondent No.3 but alleged to have been purchased without any registered sale deed but by way of purported agreement to sell by the petitioner on the basis whereof said mutation came to be availed by the petitioner to the prejudice of the respondent No.3 who then came to question the same in a revenue appeal getting successful in getting said mutation set aside which lead the petitioner to the revision petition before the Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir also suffering dismissal and then coming right before this Court under article 227 of the Constitution of India skipping over the last statutory remedy of revision before the Financial Commissioner, (Revenue) J&K. As such, this writ petition is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty in favour of the petitioner to approach Financial
Commissioner, (Revenue) J&K in exercise of his right to file a revision before the said Authority.
3. Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to the position of both the parties with respect to the subject matter.
(RAHUL BHARTI)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR: 14.07.2026 Imtiyaz
Imtiyaz Ul Gani I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 21.07.2026 17:17