Disposed¶22

Nazir Ahmad and Ors. v. Harvinder Singh and Anr. (Revenue Department)

J&K HC9 Oct 2024CCP(D)/16/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CCP(D) 16/2022 in WP(C) 2700/2021; contempt petition closed; compliance with writ direction recorded; Nazir Ahmad &Ors v Union Territory of J&K & Ors; Collector Land Acquisition (SDM) Uri; Tehsildar Uri; land regularization village Dulanja Tehsil Uri; Khasra No. 08 (23 kanals 13 marlas) and Khasra no. 26 (10 kanals 19 marlas) under physical possession of the Army; Khasra No. 187 (14 kanals 09 marlas) Khalsa Sarkar; indent and defence sanction required for release of rentals; RAIP Act; compliance report; Sindhu Sharma J.; order dated 09.10.2024; High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings closed after recording that the direction in WP(C) 2700/2021 stands complied with; petitioners left free to seek appropriate remedy available under law. ¶22

Nazir Ahmad and Ors. Vs Harvinder Singh and Anr. (Revenue Department) — J&K HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt proceedings closed after recording that the direction in WP(C) 2700/2021 stands complied with; petitioners left free to seek appropriate remedy available under law.

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the direction issued in WP(C) no. 2700/2021 on 24.12.2021 — requiring the concerned authorities to consider the petitioners' grievance regarding their land at village Dulanja, Tehsil Uri — has been complied with.

¶16

Court's answer

The direction passed in WP(C) 2700/2021 stands complied with, in view of the compliance report filed by Respondent no. 3 (SDM), Uri.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The proceedings in this contempt petition are closed.

¶22

Key takeaways

It is open to the petitioners to seek an appropriate remedy available under law for redressal of their grievances.obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt petition CCP(D) 16/2022 (in WP(C) 2700/2021, High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar) seeking implementation of the order dated 24.12.2021 passed in WP(C) no. 2700/2021 titled Nazir Ahmad &Ors versus Union Territory of J&K & Ors, wherein the petitioners had been directed to approach the Collector, Land Acquisition (SDM), Uri and the Tehsildar, Uri, who were to consider their grievance and pass appropriate orders, preferably within two months. Respondent no. 3 (SDM), Uri filed a compliance report enclosing the Tehsildar's communication dated 20.12.2022, recording that the petitioners' lands under Khasra No. 08 (23 kanals 13 marlas) and Khasra no. 26 (10 kanals 19 marlas) at village Dulanja, Tehsil Uri were under physical possession of the Army, land measuring 14 kanals 09 marlas (Khasra No. 187) was Khalsa Sarkar, the petitioners had not approached the office, and an indent with requisite sanction from the defence authorities was required to process release of rentals under the provisions of the RAIP Act. Holding the direction complied with, Justice Sindhu Sharma closed the contempt proceedings, leaving the petitioners free to seek appropriate remedy under law. Order dated 09.10.2024 (Srinagar).

¶1

S. No.24

¶2

Regular Cause List

¶3

INTHE HIGH COURT 0F JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

¶4

CCP(D) 16/2022 in [WP(C) 2700/2021]

¶5

NAZIR AHMAD AND ORS.

¶6

…Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

¶7

Through: Mr. M. M. Khan, Advocate

¶8

Vs.

¶9

HARVINDER SINGH AND ANR. (REVENUE DEPARTMENT)

¶10

...Respondent(s)

¶11

Through: Mr. Allaud din Ganai, AAG. with Ms. Shaila Shameem, AC

¶12

CORAM:

¶13

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE

¶14

ORDER

¶15

09.10.2024

¶16

Petitioner seeks implementation of the order dated 24.12.2021, passed in WP(C) no. 2700/2021 titled Nazir Ahmad &Ors versus Union Territory of J&K & Ors. The writ petition was disposed with the following direction:

¶17

“ In view of the nature of relief sought for, coupled with the agreement of the learned counsel for the petitioners, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to approach the Collector, Land Acquisition (SDM), Uri/Respondent no. 3 herein as well as Tehsildar, Uri/Respondent no. 6 herein with their grievance, as projected herein this petition within one week from the date of receipt of copy of order passed today. Upon receipt of any such application/representation, on behalf of the petitioners along with a copy of this Order, the aforesaid authorities shall consider the same and pass appropriate order thereon in accordance with the law and the rules governing the field most expeditiously, preferably within two months thereafter. Disposed of as above, along with connected CM.”

¶18

Respondent no. 3 (SDM), Uri has filed his compliance report. In terms of the compliance report, he has stated that the case of the petitioner is under active consideration and has placed on record the communication of Tehsildar dated 20.12.2022, in which the Tehsildar has stated that in order to regularize thelandof the petitioners under Khasra No. 08 measuring 23

¶19

-2-

¶20

CCP(D) 16/2022 in [WP(C) 2700/2021]

¶21

kanals 13 marlas, Khasra no. 26, measuring 10 kanals and 19 marlas situated at village Dulanja, Tehsil Uri, under physical possession of the Army and land measuring 14 kanals and 09 marlas comprising Khasra No. 187 is Khalsa Sarkar. The petitioners, it is submitted, have not approached the office, however, in order to regularize the land under the occupation of the Army and indent was to be furnished along with the requisite sanction from the defence authorities enabling the office to process the case for release of the rentals in favour of the petitioners under the provisions of RAIP Act.

¶22

Accordingly, the direction passed in WP(C) 2700/2021, stands complied with. The proceedings in this contempt petition are accordingly, closed.

¶23

It is open for the petitioners to seek appropriate remedy available to them under law for redressal of their grievances.

¶24

(SINDHU SHARMA) JUDGE

¶25

SRINAGAR 09.10.2024 “ Imtiyaz”

¶26

Imtiyaz Ul Gani I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Srinagar 16.10.2024 11.17

Nazir Ahmad and Ors. v. Harvinder Singh and Anr. (Revenue Department)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nazir Ahmad and Ors. v. Harvinder Singh and Anr. (Revenue Department)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rehmat Shafi and Anr. Vs Union Territory through Director General of Police and Ors. (Home Department)

Shah Muneer Ahmad Vs Union Territory of J and K and Anr. (Health and Medical Education Department)

Waseem Ahad and Ors. Vs Vivek Bharadwaj and Ors. (Industries and Commerce Department)

Mushtaq Ahmad Rather Vs Union of India and Ors. (Defence)

Mohammad Shafi Mantoo Vs State of J and K and Ors. (Revenue Department)

Javid Ahad War Vs U.O.I Th.Secretary Ministry of Defenc and Ors.