Mohd. Rafiq & Ors. v. UT of J&K & Ors.

Through: Mr. K M Bhatti, Advocate. q UT of J&K & Ors. Through: Mr. P D Singh, Dy. AG vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG. .…. Respondent(s) Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE ORDER 01.01.2025

Petitioners claim to be owners in possession of land comprised of Khasra nos. 288, 804, 100, 464, 480, 946 and 915 of village Draba and 604 of Tehsil Surankote District Poonch along with structures, shops and residential houses raised thereupon. Case of the petitioners is that respondents, in order to widen the Surankote Buffliaz Draba Bye-pass GREF Road, initiated the process of acquisition and issued a notification, with a list of structures coming under the road alignment. Houses and structures of the petitioners also figured in the said list. The respondents also mentioned some meagre amounts against the names mentioned in the said list without actual assessment on spot through experts. It is further case of the petitioners respondent no. 2 issued notification no. Col/DEL/OQ/2019-20/760-64 dated 30.09.2019, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, inviting objections from the land owners with respect to the proposed acquisition. The objections were filed, however, grievance 2 WP(C) no. 3078/2024 of the petitioner is that respondents neither considered the objections filed by the land owners nor concluded the acquisition proceedings and in the process with the enactment of The Reorganization Act 2019, J&K Land Acquisition Act 1990 was repealed and therefore, notification in terms of Section 4 of the J&K Land Acquisition Act, 1990 became redundant and respondents were obliged to issue fresh notification in terms of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 [the amended Land Acquisition Act]. Petitioners have relied upon orders dated 26.02.2024 and 20.12.2024 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 2247/2021 and WP(C) No. 2999/2024 respectively to claim parity.

This Court in “Mohd. Khalid & Ors. vs. UT of J&K & Ors.”; WP(C) No. 2247/2021, quashed the notification dated 30.09.2019, impugned in the present petition and directed the respondents to proceed with the acquisition process in accordance with The Amended Land Acquisition Act and this Court in “Altaf Ahmed & Anr. Vs. UT of J&K & Ors.”; WP(C) No. 2999/2024 further reiterated the aforesaid position of law with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation and directed the respondents to decide the same within a timeframe.

Mr. K M Bhatti, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that he will be satisfied if the respondents are directed to treat the present writ petition as a representation and decide the same within timeframe on 3 WP(C) no. 3078/2024 parity and on the lines the aforesaid writ petitions came to be disposed of by this Court.

Having regard to the limited nature of controversy, the present writ petition is admitted to hearing and disposed of, at the threshold, with a direction to the respondents to treat and consider the present writ petition as representation and accord consideration to the same within a period of six weeks after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner from the date a copy of this order along with copy of the writ petition and annexures are made available to them. Till then, respondents shall maintain status quo with respect to structures, shops and residential houses over the subject land. With the aforesaid direction, the present petition stands disposed

of. (Rajesh Sekhri) Judge Jammu 01.01.2025 Abinash