MOHD. BASHIR AND ORS. vs STATE TH. REVENUE DEPTT. AND ORS.

Court
Jammu and Kashmir High Court

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU

WP(C) No. 3438/2019


Reserved on: 03.11.2026
Pronounced on: 06. 11.2026
Uploaded on: 06. 11.2026
Operative part or full judgment
: Full
1. Mohd. Bashir

S/O Late Sh. Raj Mohd.

2. Mohd. Rashid
S/O late Sh. Raj Mohd.

3. Wazir Hussain
S/O Alam Din

4. Jameel Hussain
S/O Abrahim

5. Mohd. Din
S/O Shama Gujjar.
All residents of Thandi Kassi,
Tehsil and District Rajouri.


Through: Mr. Sanjay Sharma, Advocate.
Vs.
1. State of J&K through


Commissioner/Secretary
Revenue Department, J&K Govt.,
Civil Secretariat, Srinagar/Jammu



2. Financial Commissioner,
Govt., of J&K,
Civil Secretariat,
Srinagar/Jammu.




3. Custodian General,
J&K Govt., Jammu.



4. Deputy Commissioner, Rajouri

(Acting as Addl. Custodian).



.…. Respondents
Through: Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG for R-1 & 2.
Mr. Vishal Bharti, Dy. AG for R-3 & 4.

WP(C) No. 3438/2019 Page 1 of 9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, JUDGE

JUDGMENT

1. The petitioners, through the medium of this writ petition, seek
direction to the respondents to restore the land measuring 24
kanals and 1 marla in lieu of their land falling under khasra No. 51
situated at village Thandi Kassi, Tehsil and District Rajouri, which
after being declared as „Evacuee Land‟ without adopting the due
procedure of law, was subsequently allotted to a displaced person
and further directing the respondents to grant and release the
compensation as per present market rate in favour of the petitioners
for the land in question, which has been wrongly declared as
„Evacuee Land‟ under Section 6 of J&K Administration of Evacuees’
(Administration of Property) Act.
2. The petitioners have asserted in this petition that they are
owners of the land measuring 24 kanals and 1 marla falling under
khasra No. 51 situated at village Thandi Kassi, Tehsil and District
Rajouri; that the aforesaid land was declared as „Evacuee Land‟
under Section 6 of J&K Evacuees’ (Administration of Property) Act,
without issuing any notice to the owners of the property and feeling
aggrieved thereof, the owners of the land, who were the predecessors
of the petitioners herein, challenged the same before the respondent
No. 4-Additional Custodian, Rajouri, by filing a petition under
Section 8 of the J&K Evacuees’ (Administration of Property) Act,
which was allowed vide order dated 02.04.1981, holding that the

WP(C) No. 3438/2019 Page 2 of 9

predecessors of the petitioners had not migrated to Pakistan and
their property mentioned above had wrongly been declared as
„Evacuee Property‟ , before it was allotted to one Amar Chand S/O
Thakar Dass, a displaced person.
3. It was next contented that the case of the petitioners was
referred to the respondent No. 2 under Section 14-A of the J&K
Evacuees’ (Administration of Property) Act, for either allotting the
land to the petitioners in that very village having similar nature or
paying the compensation of the land along with interest; that the
respondent No. 4 informed the respondents No. 2 and 3 that no
alternate land for the allotment to the predecessors of the
petitioners was available in that village, which could be given in
exchange of the restored land to the restorees i.e., the predecessors
of the petitioners, as such, respondent No. 4 recommended that
compensation be paid to the restorees in lieu of the restored land in
terms of Section 14-A of the J&K Evacuees’ (Administration of
Property) Act.
4. The petitioners have further pleaded that the respondent No.
3-Custodian General, vide Letter No. CG (EP) 495/85 dated
08.05.1985, had taken up the matter with the Revenue Department
of the Govt. of J&K and the Revenue Secretary, vide his
communication dated 28.08.2006, asked Deputy Commissioner,
Rajouri, to furnish the record and restoration order. It was alleged
that since then the respondents have been sitting over the matter

WP(C) No. 3438/2019 Page 3 of 9

and have neither allotted any land to the petitioners nor paid any
compensation, hence this petition.
5. Pursuant to notice, the respondent-Evacuee Property
Department asserted that as per rules and regulations governing the
subject, it is not for the answering respondent-Evacuee Property
Department to allow compensation, in lieu of restored land as the
same is to be done by other respondents subject to satisfaction by
such authority, regarding the process of restoration.
6. The Respondent-Revenue Department, in their reply filed
through Deputy Commissioner, Rajouri, have asserted that as per
the Record of Rights for the year 1961-62, the land comprising of
khasra No. 51 measuring 24 kanal 1 marla was recorded in the
ownership of Fateh Mohd. Raj Mohd., Alam Din sons of Sabh Din in
equal ¼ share, Ibrahim S/O Abdullah ¼ share, Shama and Amam
Din sons of Khera equal in half share and that the entry of Fateh
Mohd., and Amam Din was as evacuee through Custodian Evacuee
Property, Jammu and Amir Chand S/O Thakur Dass as allottee.
7. What has been asserted by the Respondent No. 4-Deputy
Commissioner, Rajouri in para-2 is reproduced as under:
“That in reply to the contents of para No. 02 of the petition,
it is respectfully submitted that as Record of Rights 1961-62,
the land comprising Khasra No. 51 measuring 24 kanal 01
marlas is recorded in the ownership of Fateh Mohd., Raj
Mohd., Alam Din sons of Sabh Din in equal ¼ share, Ibraham
S/o Abdullah ¼ share, Sham and Amam Din sons of Khera
equal in half share. Fateh Mohd, Amam Din, Evacuee through
Custodian Evacuee Property, Jammu and Amir Chand son of

WP(C) No. 3438/2019 Page 4 of 9

Thakur Dass resident of Tehsil Kotli, Allottee. it is pertinent
to submit herein the aforesaid land was declared as Evacuee
Property and the same was allotted to a PoJK Refugee and
subsequently ownership rights were conferred upon them
under section 3(A) of Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976.”

8. It is an admitted case from the record made available on file
that the land measuring 24 kanals and 1 marla falling under khasra
No. 51 situated at village Thandi Kassi, Tehsil and District Rajouri
was declared as „Evacuee Property‟ in terms of Section 6 of the
J&K Evacuees’ (Administration of Property) Act and the owners
moved a petition under Section 8 of the aforesaid Act to restore the
land in their favour. However, the Deputy Commissioner, Rajouri,
exercising the power of the Additional Custodian under the J&K
Evacuees’ (Administration of Property) Act, vide order dated
02.04.1981, declared that the petitioners were entitled to the
restoration, however, as there being no land available in lieu of their
land in favour of the restorees, the original file was submitted to the
respondent No. 3-Custodian General, J&K at Jammu with a request
that an appropriate order may kindly be passed for sanctioning the
compensation in respect of the land measuring 24 kanals and 1
marla falling under khasra No. 51 situated at village Thandi Kassi,
Tehsil and District Rajouri in terms of Section 14-A of the J&K
Administration of Evacuees’ (Administration of Property) Act.
9. The Custodian General, as per record, appears to have taken
up the matter with the Revenue Department vide his
communication dated 08.05.1985. However, the petitioners have

WP(C) No. 3438/2019 Page 5 of 9

neither been paid compensation nor have they been informed about
the decision taken.
10. Section 14-A of the J&K Evacuees’ (Administration of
Property) Act provides that the Government has to restore whole or
any part of such property to the applicant in lieu of the property
belonging to Government which is, as nearly as may be, of the same
value or as the case may be. It is profitable to extract the relevant
provisions of Section 14-A of the J&K Administration of Evacuees’
(Administration of Property) Act:
14-A. [ Transfer of property in lieu of evacuee property. –
(1) Where any evacuee or his heir is entitled to the restoration
of any evacuee property on an application made by him in this
behalf [under section 14 or where the claim of any person is
established under section 8] and the Government or any
Officer not below the rank of the Financial Commissioner
authorised by the Government in this behalf, is of the opinion
that it is not expedient or practicable to restore the whole or
any part of such property to the applicant by reason of such
property or a part thereof being in the possession of a
displaced person or otherwise, then, notwithstanding anything
contained in this Act, it shall be lawful for the Government-
(a) to transfer to the applicant in lieu of the evacuee property or
any part thereof, any immovable property belonging to the
Government which, as nearly as may be, if the same value as the
evacuee property, or any part thereof, as the case may be; or
(b) to acquire any land allotted to such displaced person in
respect of which claim has been established under section 8 or 14
of this Act, by publishing a notification in the Government Gazette
to the effect that the Government has decided to acquire such land
in pursuance of this section;
(c) subject to the provisions of section 14-B, on and from the
date of publication of the notification under clause (b), the right,
title and interest of any person in the land shall be extinguished
and the land shall vest absolutely in the Government free from all
encumbrances :
Provided that the displaced person shall continue to be in
possession thereof on the same conditions on which he held it
immediately before the date of the said notification;

WP(C) No. 3438/2019 Page 6 of 9

Provided further that notwithstanding anything contained in the
State Land Acquisition Act, Samvat 1990, when a notification
under this section is made, it shall be deemed as if notification
under sections 4, 6 and 7 of the said Act have been made.]
(2) Where in pursuance of sub-section (1) any evacuee or his heir
has been granted any immovable property belonging to the
Government or the property of any evacuee has been acquired, his
right, title and interest in such evacuee property shall be deemed
to have been extinguished and vested absolutely in the
Government free from all encumbrances and the displaced person
to whom such property stands allotted under valid order, shall
continue to be in possession of such property on the same
conditions on which he hold the property immediately before it was
vested in the Government.
(3) Where in pursuance of sub-section (1) an evacuee or his heir
has been granted immovable property in lieu of evacuee property
and the evacuee or his heir has any objection to the evaluation of
the property granted to him in lieu of the evacuee property, he
may, within 90 days from the date of such grant, apply to the
Government stating the grounds of his objection and on receipt of
such application the Government shall refer the matter to the
District Judge within whose jurisdiction the property is situated,
for determining the question of evaluation of the property granted
to the applicant.”

11. From the pleadings and the record made available, it is
abundantly clear that the land of the petitioners was declared as
„Evacuee Property‟ under J&K Evacuees’ (Administration of
Property) Act and was allotted to a displaced person, namely, Amar
Chand; that on an application moved under Section 8 J&K
Evacuees’ (Administration of Property) Act by the owners of the land
in question, they were held entitled to the restoration of the land in
question, however, in view of the land having been allotted to a
displaced person, the possession of the land could not be restored to
the petitioners and instead the Evacuee Property Department
through Custodian General had taken up the matter with regard to
payment of compensation to the petitioners, in terms of Section 14-
A of the J&K Evacuees’ (Administration of Property) Act. The matter

WP(C) No. 3438/2019 Page 7 of 9

has been pending with the respondents since 1981 when they were
held entitled to the restoration of the land. Even after more than
four and a half decade, the petitioners have still been waiting for the
compensation to be paid or in the alternative to be allotted some
State land, in lieu of their land having been used for the settlement
of a displaced person.
12. Having regard to the pleadings, submissions made at the Bar
and consideration of the matter, this Court is of the considered
opinion that the petitioners are entitled to the restoration of their
land having been wrongly declared as „Evacuee Property‟, as held
by the Additional Custodian, Rajouri, which order has attained
finality, holding that the land could not be restored to the
petitioners for the reason that the same had been allotted to a
displaced person and that no land was available in the village for
being allotted to the petitioners, as such, petitioners’ case was
submitted to the office of Custodian General with a recommendation
that the petitioners be granted compensation in terms of Section 14-
A of the J&K Administration of Evacuees’ (Administration of
Property) Act and the Custodian General had also taken up the
matter with the Government through Revenue Department. In this
backdrop, the petitioners are entitled to the compensation to be
assessed by the Government, for being paid, for their land in
question.
13. Viewed thus, the petition is disposed of, directing the
respondents to assess the compensation as per prevalent market

WP(C) No. 3438/2019 Page 8 of 9

rate and make payment to the petitioners for land measuring 24
kanals and 1 marla falling under khasra No. 51 situated at village
Thandi Kassi, Tehsil and District Rajouri. This exercise shall be
undertaken and completed by the Revenue Department of the
Government of J&K, within a period of 8 weeks from the date a copy
of the judgment is made available to the Administrative Secretary of
the Revenue Department of the Government of Jammu and
Kashmir.

14. Pending application(s) also stands disposed of, accordingly.
15.




Jammu:
06.11.2026
Naresh


(M.A Chowdhary)

Judge


Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable? Yes/No

WP(C) No. 3438/2019 Page 9 of 9

Naresh Kumar
2026.11.06 16:53
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document