Dismissed

Noor Hussain and Ors. v. State Th.Urban Deptt.and Ors.

J&K HC6 Sept 2021OWP/556/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking to summon and quash land acquisition proceedings. The Court held that the petitioners failed to produce acquisition notifications or the award, which were essential for granting relief. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as misconceived.

What did the court decide?

Relief prayed for in the writ petition (summoning record and quashing proceedings) was not granted due to non-production of notifications and award.

Noor Hussain and Ors. Vs State Th.Urban Deptt.and Ors. — Land Acquisition | J&K HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

Sr. No. 62

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU

¶4

CJ Court

¶5

Case: O WP No. 556 of 2011

¶6

Noor Hussain and others

¶7

…Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)

¶8

Through: Sh. H.C.Jalmeria, Advocate.

¶9

V/s

¶10

Union of India and others

¶11

…. Respondent(s)

¶12

Through: Sh. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate

¶13

CORAM:

¶14

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Heard Sh. H.C.Jalmeria, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sh. Adarsh Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶17

The petitioners by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India want that the record of land acquisition proceedings conducted by the respondents in respect of land comprised in Khasra No. 151 measuring 33 kanal and 18 marlas situate in village Majeen of Tehsil and District Jammu may be summoned and the proceedings thereof be quashed.

¶18

The petitioners in filing this writ petition have nowhere mentioned and stated as to when the proceedings for acquisition were initiated or the dates of the various notifications issued under the Act for acquiring the land. The notifications in this regard have also not been brought on record.

¶19

The petitioners simply contend that they are the owners in possession

¶20

of the said land from the times of their ancestors and that they have no

¶21

¶22

knowledge of the acquisition proceedings, award if any, and that they have not been paid any compensation.

¶23

In view of the aforesaid averments, it is apparent that the petitioners

¶24

are aware that the land has been acquired but still has not cared to find out and to bring on record the various notifications acquiring the land or even the copy of the award if any.

¶25

The petitioners further state that the respondents without any legal right threatened to dispossess them from the aforesaid land and, on inquiry, it was informed that the land has been acquired.

¶26

In the event, any party has threatened the petitioners from dispossession of the land without following the procedure prescribed in law, the remedy available to the petitioners may be by way of civil suit or in the event the petitioners contend that the land has been acquired but without following the statutory provisions then it is incumbent upon the petitioners to have mentioned the dates of the notifications under which the land is so acquired and to bring those notifications on record.

¶27

In the absence of the notifications on record, the relief as prayed for by the petitioners cannot be granted to them.

¶28

The writ petition is misconceived and is dismissed.

¶29

(RAJNESH OSWAL) (PANKAJ MITHAL) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶30

Jammu 06.09.2021 Tilak Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No Whether the order is reportable? Yes/No

Noor Hussain and Ors. v. State Th.Urban Deptt.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Noor Hussain and Ors. v. State Th.Urban Deptt.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd.Aslam Vs State Th.Home Deptt.and Ors.

Mohd.Rafiq Vs State Th.S.S.P.Poonch and Ors.

Dullah Khan and Ors. Vs Mohd.Iftikhar and Anr.

M/S Satyam Cements Near Industrial Area,Rakh Jalphar Kathua (J and K ) Th. Its Managing Partner Vs Union of India through Secretary to Government

Suman Lata Vs Deputy Director Estates Jammu, Estates Department

Narinder Pal Singh Vs the Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. Th Branch Manager