Share your story and shine at JK Monitor!š Welcome to JK Monitor, where every story matters and every achievement is celebrated! We invite you to share the remarkable journey of your life and showcase your accomplishments to the world. Join our exclusive interviews that honor exceptional individuals just like you. JAMMU: In response to the recent allegations against Revenue officers regarding purported manipulation in land records related to Khasra No. 856 in Raipur Domana village, the office of Tehsildar Jammu North has firmly rebutted these claims. The accusations, spearheaded by the Managing Editor of a local daily, have been declared unfounded and damaging to the reputation of the concerned officer.
Following a thorough preliminary inquiry, it has been established that the Fard was issued on June 26, 2024, with all necessary formalities duly completed. The document was uploaded on the revenue portal, detailing Mutations viz. 570 (Sec 17 of BLEAA 2007 Bikrami Svt.), Mutation no. 794 (Inheritance), and Mutation no. 1205 (Inheritance) for 13 Marlas intended for sale. An inadvertent error occurred during data entry by the concerned Patwari Halqa, mistakenly recording Mutation no. 1205 instead of 1304, which should reflect the inheritance of Barkat Ali devolved upon applicant Nazir Mohd. All other details, including First Party and Second Party information, were accurate according to the recorded entries.
Upon issuance of the Fard, the applicant promptly reported the discrepancy to the revenue field staff. The necessary correction was made by Patwari and Naib Tehsildar Mishriwala, who updated the mutation number on the computerised Fard copy, duly signed, sealed, and attested as per protocol.
The applicant subsequently sought the Tehsildar's office for countersigning the corrected document. Tehsildar Jammu North, Aman Kumar Anand, after verifying the correction with the field staff and revenue records, duly countersigned the document.
According to prevailing rules, Naib Tehsildar is the designated officer for issuing Fard Intikhab under PSGA, while Patwari and Girdawar are responsible for preparing and comparing records on-site. This process is outlined in various orders, notifications, and circulars issued by competent authorities.
Tehsil Jammu North, one of the busiest tehsils, handles a significant volume of revenue services daily. Given the volume of data entry required on the revenue portal, occasional errors may occur, which are promptly corrected by the revenue field staff upon notification. Legal procedures for corrections and rectifications are standard practice, including updates to names, Khasra numbers, and other details, with due certification by designated officers.
Verification from revenue records revealed no custodian department entries for Khasra No. 856, Raipur Domana. The land in question, originally recorded under Mohakkam Din and others via mutation no. 570 dated December 25, 1952, subsequently transferred to Barkat Ali through mutation no. 794 dated December 22, 1956, and then to Nazir Mohd via mutation no. 1304 dated March 28, 2008.
In light of these facts, the allegations published by Mohit Mehra in Daily Jammu Jottings are baseless and have been categorically denied. The inadvertent error made by the Patwari, which was swiftly corrected, does not constitute tampering with revenue records.
