JAMMU, Aug 11:
Jammu and Kashmir Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) on Monday said to have registered a case against the then Patwari Halqa Sunjwan and others for illegal mutation of land records.
A spokesman in a statement said that Jammu and Kashmir Anti Corruption Bureau registered a formal case FIR No. 17/2025 u/s 5(1) (d) r/w section 5(2) of J&K PC Act, Svt. 2006 & section 120-B RPC at P/S ACB Jammu against Aslam Din, then Tehsildar (Settlement) Jammu (now expired), Mohd Iqbal Zargar, then Patwari Halqa Sunjwan (now retired as Naib Tehsildar) as well as beneficiaries Mohd Rashid S/O Imam Din R/O Jalalabad Sunjwan Jammu, Mohd Mushtaq S/O Bashir Ahmad R/O Sunjwan Jammu and others, on the outcome of verification conducted into the allegations of illegal and fraudulent tampering of the revenue record of original owners in order to confer undue pecuniary benefit upon beneficiaries and corresponding wrongful gain to themselves.
“The verification conducted revealed that mutation No. 689/Jeem was attested under section 121 of J&K Land Revenue Act covering land under khasra Nos.
918, 970, 994, 1024, 1623 & 1623 min at Village Sunjwan, Tehsil Bahu, District Jammu on 27.03.2010 by then Tehsildar (settlement) Jammu. The land measuring 15 Kanals 14 Marlas was registered on the name of beneficiary Mohd Rashid and land measuring 69 kanals was registered on the name of beneficiary Mohd Mushtaq & others,” the statement reads.
Financial Commissioner, Revenue J&K vide order dated 26.09.2017 set aside the impugned mutation No. 689/jeem dated 27.03.2010 in question and directed to restore the entries which were existing prior to attestation of said mutation. Further, as per Land Revenue Act, the attestation of mutation u/s 121 Land Revenue Act could be made only by settlement officer but in the instant case, the mutation was attested by then Tehsildar, Settlement which was beyond his powers, the statement reads.
“The mutation in question was entered by then Patwari Halqa, Sunjwan namely Mohd Iqbal Zargar when he was not posted in the said Patwar Halqa. The said mutation No. 689/jeen dated 27.03.2010 was also attested in violation of Para-9 of standing order No. 23-A, as the same mutation No. 689/jeem has already been attested in the year 2008 in the same village (i.e., two mutations having same serial nos. 689/jeem were attested in the years 2008 & 2010 in the same village),” the spokesman said, adding that further investigation is going on.