SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh has directed the Tehsildar South, Srinagar, to issue revenue extracts or Fards to two Baghat Barzulla residents within one week, observing that revenue authorities cannot refuse such documents merely because a village map or Aksa Latha is unavailable.
Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani passed the directions while disposing of a petition filed by Sheikh Rafiq Ahmad and his wife, Rifat Rafiq, residents of Baghat Barzulla, Srinagar.
The petitioners had approached the High Court after the revenue authorities allegedly declined to issue the required Fards for their land. They told the court that they needed the documents to execute formal rent or lease deeds with tenants occupying portions of a commercial building constructed on their property.
According to the petition, the couple owns and possesses land at Baghat Barzulla falling under the relevant survey numbers by virtue of a sale deed. They stated that after obtaining building permission from the competent authority, they constructed a commercial building on the property and subsequently rented out portions of it.
The petitioners said they had applied online for revenue extracts to enable execution of formal lease or rent agreements but the documents were not issued despite repeated requests.
They further submitted that the Tehsildar South had declined to issue the Fards on the ground that the village map or Aksa Latha was not available in the Tehsil office.
The petitioners also relied on a September 9, 2026 order issued by the Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir, directing Deputy Commissioners to provide services to citizens in accordance with standing orders and take measures for the re-creation of missing or dilapidated Massavies in accordance with applicable norms.
Their counsel argued that withholding the revenue extracts within the prescribed period amounted to a violation of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Services Guarantee Act, 2011. It was also submitted that the alleged inaction had prevented the petitioners from fully utilising their lawfully owned property and infringed their constitutional rights under Article 300-A.
Court: Revenue authorities cannot refuse Fards
The High Court held that the Revenue Department, as custodian of land records, cannot refuse to issue revenue extracts unless their issuance is expressly barred by an order of a Revenue Court, Civil Court or another competent authority in pending or concluded litigation.
Justice Wani observed that officials authorised to issue Fards may record relevant legal or factual matters in the document but cannot withhold its issuance on that ground.
The court also made it clear that issuing a revenue extract does not, by itself, alter the entries recorded in the revenue records. Any change to such entries must be made strictly in accordance with law.
The court said relevant court directions, orders or government instructions could instead be mentioned by way of a footnote in the revenue extract so that the authority dealing with any subsequent transaction could take them into consideration.
The court also referred to the Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir’s communication of September 9, 2026, requiring Deputy Commissioners in the Kashmir Division to ensure compliance with government instructions and adherence to the Public Services Guarantee Act.
Tehsildar directed to issue Fards within one week
The court noted that the petitioners had placed on record a copy of their registered sale deed and Khasra Girdawari. The documents, according to the order, reflected their ownership and possession of land measuring 1 Kanal 7½ Marlas under the relevant survey numbers.
Holding that the matter could be resolved at the preliminary stage, the High Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents, particularly the Tehsildar South, Srinagar, to issue the petitioners’ revenue extracts/Fards in accordance with the rules.
The court directed that the documents be issued within one week from the date a copy of the order is submitted at the office of the Tehsildar South.
The writ petition, along with the connected application, was accordingly disposed of.
