The High Court dismissed an intra-court appeal challenging an interim order directing a spot inspection of land disputed between the appellant and the UT of J&K.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Serial No. 06
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
LPA No. 191/2026 In WP(C) No. 890/2026 CM No. 6353/2026 Cav No. 1993/2026
Raj Singh
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Nitin Bhasin, Advocate
vs
UT of J&K & Ors.
.…Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr.AAG with Ms. Priyanka Bhat, Advocate Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG Mr. Manik Bhardwaj, Advocate
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAHZAD AZEEM, JUDGE
ORDER (14.09.2026)
Impugned in this intra court appeal is an interim order dated 09.07.2026,
passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court [“Writ Court”] in WP(C) No. 890/2026, whereby the Writ Court has directed the Deputy Commissioner, Reasi to depute a senior revenue officer for spot inspection and furnish a report to the Court. It is further provided in the order that in case the construction being raised by respondent No.7, is found to be on the land beyond the land measuring 3 kanals donated by the appellant, the official respondents shall follow the acquisition proceedings and award compensation as applicable.
Briefly put, the case set up by the appellant before the Writ Court is that, though, he has donated 3 kanals of land for construction of the school, however,
official respondents along with respondent No.7, are raising construction on the land beyond the donated land of 3 kanals.
With a view to sort out the factual dispute, the Writ Court has very aptly directed the Deputy Commissioner, Reasi to depute a senior officer for spot inspection and to find out exactly the land, which is under construction.
The Writ Court has protected the interest of the appellant by providing further that in case, upon spot inspection, it is found that respondents are raising construction on the land beyond donated 3 kanals of land, the official respondents shall follow the acquisition proceedings. Since, interim order passed by Writ Court protects the interest of the appellant and is necessary to maintain equilibrium. It does not call for any interference by this Court. This appeal is found to be devoid of any merit, hence, dismissed .
(SHAHZAD AZEEM) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE
Jammu 14.09.2026 Sapna
Raj Singh
UT of J&K
Sanjeev Kumar
Shahzad Azeem
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
