Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Reeta Devi vs Union Territory Of J&K on 20 December, 2024
Author: Wasim Sadiq Nargal
Bench: Wasim Sadiq Nargal
Sr.No. 79
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
Case: WP (C) No. 3003/2024
CM No. 7391/2024
Reeta Devi, Age 52 years ....Appellant/Petitioner(s)
W/o Santosh Kumari
W/o Jallo Chak, Jammu.
Through :- Mr. Gagan Oswal, Advocate.
V/s
01. Union Territory of J&K ....Respondent(s)
Through Commissioner Secretary Ministry
of Revenue Government of Jammu and
Kashmir.
02. Inspector General of Registration
298-299 Shastri Nagar Jammu.
03. Sub-Registrar Jammu South Jammu
Through :- Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG .
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE
ORDER
20.12.2024
01. Petitioner, through the medium of the instant petition, is seeking a
direction upon the respondents to release an amount Rs. 3,55,200/-, which has
been inadvertently deposited in the account head of Sub Registrar, Jammu South
vide GR No. JK000822782202223P with a further direction upon the respondent
No. 3, to decide the application dated 30.07.2024 forwarded by respondent No.2.
02. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner inadvertently deposited an
amount of Rs. 3,55,200/- in the account head of respondent No. 3 vide GR No.
JK000822782202223P.
03. It is further stated that respondent No. 1 vide circular No. 04-JK(Rev) of
2024 dated 22.05.2024 had provided the procedure to be adopted for getting the
refund of the registration fees.
2
04. It is further stated that the petitioner has moved a representation dated
30.07.2022 before respondent No. 2 and the said respondent vide letter dated
13.09.2023 forwarded the same to respondent No. 3 for considering the same.It
is further stated that since the issuance of letter dated 13.09.2023, representation
of the petitioner is pending with respondent No. 3 and respondent No. 3 is not
deciding the same and has not made the refund to the petitioner till date.
05. Feeling aggrieved of the inaction on the part of the respondents, petitioner
has approached this Court by way of the instant writ petition.
06. After arguing for a while, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner would feel satisfied in case, the instant petition is
disposed of by directing the respondents to accord consideration to the case of
the petitioner by treating the instant writ petition as representation and to accord
consideration within some stipulated time.
07. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the record.
08. Issue notice to the respondents.
09. Ms. Monika Kohli, learned Sr. AAG waives notice on behalf of the
respondents and she submits that she is not averse to the aforesaid preposition
provided the case of the petitioner is directed to be accorded consideration under
rules and as per law.
10. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition
is taken up for final disposal at the very threshold and, is accordingly, disposed
of by directing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to treat the instant writ petition as a
representation and accord consideration to the same within six weeks from the
date a copy of this order and writ petition along with the annexure(s) are made
available to the respondents, strictly under rules and as per law. The order of
consideration which is likely to be passed be forwarded to the petitioner by the
respondents through registered post.
3
11. Thus, the instant writ petition, is accordingly, ‘disposed of’ along with
connected application(s).
(Wasim Sadiq Nargal)
Judge
Jammu:
20.12.2024
RenuWhether the Order is speaking? Yes/No.
Whether the Order is reportable? Yes/ No.Renu Bala
2024.12.21 16:23
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document