SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(J&K) 309

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Muzaffar Hussain Attar, J.
Gh. Mohd. Changa & Anr. -Appellant
Versus
State & Ors. -Resopndent
OWP 1529-2013
Decided On : 14-08-2014

Advocates Appeared:
M.A. Qayoom, S.T. Hussain.

The court emphasized the importance of affording opportunity of hearing, the application of principles of natural justice, and the duty of the competent authority to objectively determine the controversy and state reasons for arriving at a conclusion.

Headnote:

Certiorari - Eviction Order - Jammu & Kashmir Migrants Immoveable Property (Preservation, Protection & Restrain On Distress Sales) Act, 1997 - Section 13 - Summary: The court quashed the eviction order and directed reconsideration of the issue by the District Magistrate in accordance with the law and observations made in the order, emphasizing the need for affording opportunity of hearing and considering any document/material produced by the parties.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners were tenants of a property but were directed to be evicted by the District Magistrate. The petitioners challenged the order, citing lack of opportunity of hearing and violation of principles of natural justice.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the impugned order was issued without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and without ascertaining whether they were actually unauthorized occupants of the property. The court also noted that the order suffered from a lack of application of mind.

Issues: The issues included the maintainability of the writ petition, the availability of alternate remedy of appeal, and the application of the principle of constructive res judicata.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the availability of the alternate remedy of appeal did not prevent it from exercising its writ jurisdiction, especially considering the unfairness and injustice of asking the petitioners to surrender possession before filing an appeal. The court also found that the principle of constructive res judicata was not attracted in the case, as the appellate authority had not decided the issue on merits in the appeal.

Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition by quashing the impugned order and directing the District Magistrate to reconsider the issue in accordance with the law and observations made in the order, emphasizing the need for affording opportunity of hearing to the parties and entertaining any document/material they may produce.

1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of writ of Certiorari for quashing order dated 21-08-2013, passed by District Magistrate, Anantnag, whereunder it is directed that unauthorized occupants of Plot No. 148 be evicted forthwith with further direction to Tehsildar, Pahalgam, to execute the order with police assistance, if needed; the attorney holder be put in possession of the property and the rent for the period the property was in unauthorized possession be recovered in terms of section 13 of the Jammu & Kashmir Migrants Immoveable Property (Preservation, Protection & Restrain On Distress Sales) Act, 1997 (for short Act of 1997).

2. The Court, on 31-10-2013, while issuing notice, directed that the impugned order shall remain in abeyance till next date before the bench.

3. The private respondents, through their attorney holder, have filed objections/ additional Affidavit.

4. Mr. Qayoom, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that one Shri Shamboo Nath Sazwal, now dead, inducted the petitioners as tenants of his shop in the ground floor and a room in the first floor, constructed on Plot No. 148, situated at Pahalgam. He further submitted that the petitioners are running the shop under the name and style of M/s. Pahalgam Arts. In order to buttress his argument, learned counsel referred to the documents enclosed as annexure (A) to the writ petition. Learned counsel further submitted that one Shri Inder Mohan Harkar, attorney of Shri Somnath, filed OWP 74/2008 qua the property, which is subject maTter of this writ petition but the said petition was dismissed by the Court on 14-09-2009. Learned counsel further submitted that two sons of late Shri Shamboo Nath Sazwal, respondents 4&5 in this petition, filed OWP 354/2005 before the Jammu Wing of this court, praying therein that respondents 1&2 - State of J&K through Financial Commissioner and District Magistrate, Anantnag, be asked to direct respondents 3 to 5 to surrender the possession of the share of three storeyed building situated at main market, Pahalgam, being illegally and unauthorizedly occupied by them without consent of the petitioners therein. Further reliefs were also sought in the writ petition. Learned counsel produced certified copy of the writ petition (OWP 354/2005) at the time of hearing of the case, which was ordered to be taken on record. Learned counsel submitted that the Court, in the above writ petition, directed the District Magistrate, Anantnag, to conduct enquiry and submit report. Learned counsel submitted that after conducting the enquiry, the District Magistrate reached to conclusion that the petitioners are not unauthorized occupants of the property but are tenants of the same. Mr. Qayoom submitted that after receipt of report from the District Magistrate, the writ petitioners in OWP 354/2005, viz., sons of late Shri Shamboo Nath Sazwal, withdrew the first relief so for as it related to the petitioners and by virtue of Court order dated 02-02-2010, the petitioners were deleted from the array of respondents. Learned counsel further submitted that OWP 354/2005 was disposed of by the Court vide order dated 10-07-2013, directing the Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag, to look into the grievances projected in the writ petition and take action in the facts and circumstances of the case. The order was hedged with the condition that action shall be taken after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties to project their respective stands.

5. Mr. Qayoom further submitted that without putting the petitioners on notice and without affording them opportunity of hearing, the District Magistrate passed order dated 21-08-2013, which is called in question in this writ petition. Learned counsel further submitted that initially the statutory Appeal was filed against the eviction order dated 21-08-2013 passed by the District Magistrate, Anantnag. Learned counsel submitted that an Application seeking withdrawal of the Appeal was filed befor



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top