LPA No. 240 of 2019 · High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh
Case at a glance
- Bench
- RAJESH SEKHRI, RAJNESH OSWAL
Outcome
Dismissed
In view of this, the present appeal is dismissed as having been rendered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. In view of this, the present appeal is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. (RAJESH SEKHRI) JUDGE (RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE Jammu 17.05.2024 Eva Eva Gupta 2024.05.24 10:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Judgment
Through: Mr. P.N. Bhat, Advocate. Vs State of J&K .…. Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr.AAG. Mr. G.S. Thakur, Advocate. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE ORDER 17.05.2024
The writ petition was filed by the private respondents for directing respondent Nos.2 to 4 to implement the order dated 18.05.2015 passed by respondent No.4 and subsequent order dated 09.01.2016 passed by respondent No.2 in its letter and spirit for handing over the possession of land measuring 15 kanal 18 marla situated at village Bomal Tehsil Jourian District Jammu to the private respondents as being prospective owners declared under Section 8(3) of J&K State lands (vesting of ownership rights to the occupants)Act, 2001 after evicting the illegal encroachers of the land as they have been alloted 05 marlas of residential plot at Gurah along with cash relief of Rs.50,000/- each.
The writ petition was disposed of by writ Court vide order dated
04.05.2017 by directing respondent No.4, i.e. Tehsildar Jourian to implement the order dated 18.05.2015. It is this order dated 04.05.2017 which has been impugned by the appellants in the present intra-court 2 appeal on the ground that they were not arrayed as parties to the writ petition. Having gone through the merits of the case, we find that since the J&K State lands (vesting of ownership rights to the occupants) Act, 2001 has been repealed, the private respondents have lost their status of prospective owners under Section 8(3) of the Act (supra), if any and the order dated 18.05.2015 passed by respondent No.4 has also lost its relevance.
Operative part
In view of this, the present appeal is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. (RAJESH SEKHRI) JUDGE (RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE Jammu 17.05.2024 Eva Eva Gupta 2024.05.24 10:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.