Disposed

Ghulam Mohammad Magray and Ors. v. Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (Revenue Department)

J&K HC16 Dec 2022WP(C)/2859/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh disposed of the matter in view of the consent of both parties, restraining official respondents from evicting petitioners from proprietary land without following prescribed legal procedure.

What did the court decide?

Direction that petitioners shall not be evicted from their proprietary land without following procedure prescribed by law.

Ghulam Mohammad Magray and Ors. Vs Union Territory of J and K… — Property and Title | J&K HC (2022)

¶1

Supplementary Serial 126

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

¶3

WP (C) 2859/2022 CM (7209/2022)

¶4

Ghulam Mohammad Magray and others

¶5

… Petitioner/Appellant(s)

¶6

Through: Mr. Mohammad Ilyas, Advocate

¶7

V/s

¶8

UT of J&K and others

¶9

… Respondent(s)

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE

¶11

O R D E R 16-12-2022

¶12

The petitioners in the instant petition filed under Article 226, constitution of India, seek a writ of mandamus against the official respondent for restraining them from causing any interference into the peaceful possession of the proprietary land of the petitioners as also from carving out any road over the proprietary land except after following due procedure of law.

¶13

According to counsel for the petitioners, the official respondents in order to benefit private respondents 13 and 14 have started underhand means to dispossess the petitioners from their proprietary land covered under survey Nos. 282, 147, 1254/144, 1773/1259/149, 165, 223, 123, 1479/1086/220, 1087/220 and 444 situated at Mouza Cheerwan, tehsil Kangan district Ganderbal without following procedure established under law.

¶14

According to counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners have been in peaceful possession and occupation of their respective parcels of land and the official respondents at the behest of private respondents are seeking to evict the petitioners from the land in question for the purpose of constructing a road for the private respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submit that right to property though not a fundamental right, yet is a constitutional right under Article 300A and

¶15

WP (C) 2859/2022

¶16

Page 2 of 2

¶17

that constitutional right in essence is akin to right to life enshrined under the Constitution. The counsel for the petitioners further submit that the petitioners cannot be divested of their proprietary land in breach of the said constitutional provision by the official respondents in league and connivance with the private respondents.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioners, in view of the nature of controversy involved in the petition, would pray for disposal of the writ petition at this stage with a direction to the respondents not to evict the petitioners from their proprietary land or else to construct the road in question but only after following procedure establishing under law.

¶19

Mr. Faheem Shah, GA present, enters appearance on behalf of official respondents vice Mr. Mohsin Qadiri, Sr. AAG. Mr. Shah is not averse to the disposal of the petition at this stage as also to the relief being prayed for by the counsel for the petitioners.

¶20

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the instant petition is taken up for final disposal at this stage with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, and is disposed of by providing that the petitioners shall not be evicted by the official respondents from their proprietary land claimed to have been in their possession as detailed out in the petition without following procedure prescribed by law.

¶21

Disposed of.

¶22

It is made clear that no opinion about the merit of the case has been expressed here-in-above.

¶23

(JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE

¶24

Srinagar 16-12-2022 N Ahmad

Ghulam Mohammad Magray and Ors. v. Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (Revenue Department)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghulam Mohammad Magray and Ors. v. Union Territory of J and K and Ors. (Revenue Department)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Yousuf Mir Vs Union Territory of J and K through Commissioner Secretary to Government

Mst. Khatija Begum Vs State of Jk and Others (Home Department)

Mohammad Shafi Khanday and Ors. Vs Mandeep Kour (Rural Development Department)

Ravi Sethi Vs State Th.Information Deptt.and Ors.

Ram Lal. Vs Ramesh Chander and Ors.

Shaheen Akhter Vs State Th.Social Welfare Deptt. and Ors.