1. A hazy scenario about the conflicting factual claims has been put forth by the parties in the writ petition and the objections filed thereto. The writ court is called upon to adjudicate upon the facts which are not admitted but are disputed. This court is not powerless to enter into factual dispute, but as the writ petition can be decided on a pure question of law, so refrains to enter into factual thicket.

2. For appreciating the controversy claims are briefly stated:-

The petitioner claims to have purchased residential house including an outhouse known as "Geetanjili" located at Shivpora Srinagar. Petitioner claims that respondent No.9 acting through respondent No.8 & 10 negotiated deal for sale of the said house, which initially was rented out to the petitioner. The petitioner, thus, claims to be authorized occupant of the property, being in occupation and possession of the property with the consent of migrant owner. Respondent No.9, hereinafter, referred to, as owner, allegedly agreed to sell the property to the petitioner who was already in possession thereof in the capacity of a tenant, for an amount of Rs.6/- lacs. It is further alleged that out of the consideration amount of Rs.6/- lacs, Rs.4/- lacs were paid on 7.12.1996 and from out of balance of Rs. 2/- lacs, it is alleged by the petitioner, that an amount of Rs.1.30 lacs was paid to the owner on 3rd March 1998. The petitioner has placed on writ record a communication dated 28th August 1995 from respondent No.8 authorizing the petitioner to occupy and posses the property as tenant for a period of 20 months on a fixed rent of Rs. 500/- per month. Other documents have been placed on record by the petitioner, by which an effort is made to demonstrate that the property has been sold to him by the owner. One such document is an application made to Divisional Commissioner Kashmir seeking permission to alienate the migrant property to the petitioner. Another document placed on writ record is a communication made by the owner addressed to Inspector General of Police, dated 05.09.2000, which reflects the mind of the owner about disputed property, as she has in unequivocal terms withdrawn the complaint against the alleged illegal occupant and requested the authority that action, if any, initiated against the present occupant be stopped. This withdrawal of the complaint appears to be fallout of the agreement which respondent No.8 had entered into with respondent No.10. Record also reveals that communication was issued by Additional Deputy Commissioner Srinagar and addressed to Tehsildar Srinagar dated 17th May 2002 in which the Tehsildar was directed to evict the illegal occupant, if any, strictly under law. The said communication is reproduced as under:-

"The Tehsildar

Srinagar

No. 27-76/RI/OM/Mig/02 dated 17.5.2002

Sub:- Illegal occupation of House known as "Geentanjali" House at Shivpora Srinagar.

Sir,

In connection with the subject and reference cited above, your are directed to evict the illegal occupant, if any strictly under law, after inventory-sation in presence of S.H.O concerned and take over the immovable property in question under your custody on behalf of the District Magistrate Srinagar. The compliance report should reach this office by or before 18.05.2002."

3. The Tehsildar had marked the said order/communication to Naib Tehsildar who in turn submitted its report to Tehsildar Srinagar vide communication dated 1.11.2002. The Naib Tehsildar after visiting the spot and hearing the petitioner concluded by observing that the petitioner has occupied the property in question legally and is in peaceful possession of the same, so cannot be disturbed. Along with the said communication eighteen leaves were enclosed thereof. The writ record further reveals that the matter went in to hibernation till 7th April 2007 when District Magistrate Srinagar passed an order based on the communication dated 17th May 2002 directing Tehsildar to submit compliance report in view of the order

Click Here to Read the rest of this document