The main legal point established is that the jurisdiction over vesting of ownership rights in state land for public purposes lies with the authority constituted under the Jammu and Kashmir Land (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) (Amendment) Act, 2004, and not with the writ court.

Bansi Lal Bhat, J.

The instant petition is segregated from OWP No. 1280/2004 and is taken up separately.

2. Petitioners' case is that in terms of Government Order No. Rev(NOJ) 314 of 1985, dated 13.09.1985, Government accorded sanction to transfer of leasehold rights in respect of 25 kanals and 4 marlas comprising Khasra No. 332 and 17 kanal 8 marlas comprising Khasra No. 334/min situated at Jammu Khas in favour of petitioners in terms of provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Grants Act, 1960. This was followed by execution of lease deed dated 28.04.1986. It is claimed that the petitioners were put in possession of the aforesaid land and they continued to be in peaceful possession to the extent of their shares. It is further averred in the petition that the land in question was to be used for building and cultivation purposes. Since leasehold rights of original lessee-Bhagat Ram Raina were to expire on 23.02.1955, the lease deed executed between the petitioners and the Government provided for transfer of leasehold rights in favour of petitioners for remaining period of nine years and three months, i.e. up to 23.02.1995. It is further averred in the petition that in terms of lease agreement, petitioners were provided the option of renewal of leasehold rights for further period not exceeding 20 years. Petitioners had constructed few rooms for watch and ward of the land in question with a house comprising of six rooms and the remaining land was used for agricultural purposes. It was before the expiry of period of lease that all the petitioners separately applied for extension of period of lease before Assistant Commissioner, Nazool Jammu who sought NOC from JDA after a period of seven years and the JDA conveyed its NOC vide letter No. 747, dated 07.08.2002 from Chief Town Planner. The land, thus, continued to be in possession of petitioners. However, JDA entered into the premises with proposed plan of making parking area in the aforesaid land. Petitioners came to know that in terms of communication dated 21.07.2006, Assistant Commissioner Nazool had proposed transfer of 13 kanals and 7 marlas comprising Khasra No. 334/min situated at Jammu Khas for construction of parking stand of JDA Jammu. Petitioners claim to have learnt that the Deputy Commissioner had directed transferring of vacant Government land to JDA but never informed the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in PIL that the said land was in possession of petitioners. The action of respondents is alleged to be arbitrary and suffering from non application of mind. Petitioners claim to have applied for conferring of ownership rights in their favour in terms of provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Land (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act, 2001.

3. Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 have filed their reply contesting the petition on the ground that the land in question situated between Exhibition Ground and Jogi Gate Bye-pass road adjacent to Christian Graveyard was initially leased out to one Bhagat Ram Raina for a period of 40 years and upon the death of Bhagat Ram Raina, his son Shri Kant applied for transfer of leasehold rights to petitioners. The Government transferred leasehold rights of 13 kanals 7 marlas of land situated at Below Gummat Jammu held by Shri Kant Raina in favour of petitioners for building and cultivation purposes and the lease period has expired in February, 1995. It is pleaded that though the lessee had applied for the renewal of the lease but it was never renewed in his favour. The land under reference is Nazool land lying vacant on spot. It is further pleaded that after expiry of lease, the land reverted back to the State and the possession thereof was delivered to JDA on 04.10.2006 for developing of parking lot. It is further pleaded that the petitioners have not applied for vesting of ownership rights under the Amended Act. Moreover, the land used is for public purpose and no ownership rights can be conferred in terms of provisions of Section 8(d