IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
Sanjeev Kumar, J.
Syed Yaseen Shah and Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Union Territory of J&K and Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No.465/2021, CM No.1444/2021 c/w CCP(S) No.156/2021
Decided On : 12-05-2022
Jammu and Kashmir State Evacuees' (Administration of Property) Act, 2006-Section 30-A-Jammu & Kashmir State Evacuees' (Administration of Property) Rules, 2008-Rule 13-C-Constitution of India-Article 226-Writ Petition-Alternative remedy-Petitioners have not availed of equally efficacious statutory remedy of revision provided under Section 30-A of Act and have filed instant petition directly extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court-Neither impugned order has been assailed on the ground that it is wholly without jurisdiction and does not lie in competence of Custodian General nor there is any challenge laid to any of provisions of Act and Rules framed thereunder-Objection raised by respondents with regard to maintainability of this writ petition in face of availability of equally efficacious statutory alternative remedy under the Act succeeds and this petition is found not entertainable or maintainable-Writ Petition dismissed with liberty to petitioners to work out alternative remedy available under the Act. (Paras 10, 12, 14 and 15)
Result-Writ Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
1. In this petition, the petitioners have, inter alia, prayed for issuance of following writs:-
(ii) A writ, order or direction including one in the nature of Mandamus commanding upon the respondents to refrain and desist from raising any construction on spot or from changing the nature and character of the land in question.
(iii) A writ, order or direction including one in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned building permission dated 19-1-2021.”
2. Briefly put, facts, as projected by the petitioners in this petition, are that a piece of land measuring 4 marlas 62 sqft under survey No.1288-Min khewat No.05, Khata No.07 situated at Brari Numbal [ “the subject land”] is part of an ancestral property of the petitioners and respondent No.4 along with other co-sharers/descendants of their common ancestors, namely, Syed Mehdi and Syed Assadullah. It is submitted that Syed Mehdi and Syed Assadullah were brothers and jointly owned land measuring 86 marlas under survey No.1288 at Brari Numbal, Khanyar Srinagar. It is claimed that the petitioners being the descendants of Syed Mehdi inherited 15 marlas as against Syed Rasool Shah, father of respondent No.4, inherited 14 marlas. Said Syed Rasool Shah, however, migrated to Pakistan and was, thus, declared as evacuee. He is survived by respondent No.4 and another daughter Ms. Saima Mubeen resident of Munawarabad, Khayam, Srinagar. It is submitted that the property of evacuee Syed Rasool Shah has been declared as evacuee property by respondent No.3 in terms of notification dated 31.05.1958. It is stated that respondent No.4 claiming to be an allottee of the evacuee land left behind by her father , in terms of an order of allotment bearing No.1044 dated 27.06.1959 as also owner in possession of land measuring 4 marlas in the same survey number instituted a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction against her sister Mst. Saima Mubeen and one of the petitioners i.e. petitioner No.2 in the Court of 1st Civil Subordinate Judge (Municipal Magistrate), Srinagar. It is contended that the Civil Suit was filed by respondent NO.4 only with a view to legitimise her encroachment over the landed property of the petitioners measuring 4.6 marlas as was left with them after acquisition of a part of land measuring 10.5 marlas out of their landed property of 15 marlas. The said civil suit was, however, dismissed. After the dismissal of the suit, with a view to defeat the legal rights of the petitioners over the land encroached by respondent No.4, she executed a sale deed on 03.06.2019 in favour of respondent Nos. 5 and 6. The said sale deed executed by respondent No.4 in favour of respondent nos. 5 and 6 is also subject matter of challenge before the competent Court of civil jurisdiction i.e. 4th Additional District Judge, Srinagar.
3. In a nutshell, the grievance of the petitioners is that the subject land, which is sold by respondent No.4 to respondent Nos. 5 and 6 is the land of the the petitioners forcibly encroached by respondent No.4. It is the contention of the petitioners that while the parties were litigating in the Civil Courts, respondent No.2, in terms of order No.81 of 2020 dated 13.10.2020, accorded sanction for lease of the subject land in favour of respondent Nos. 5 and 6 for commercial purposes. The subject land was allotted in favour of respondent Nos. 5 and 6 on the basis of some report submitted by respondent No.3 to respondent NO.2 to the effect that even, though, land measuring 2 kanals and 09 marlas and 124 sft. and a house constructed thereon stood notified as evacuee property during the year 1957 in the name of Syed Rasool Shah, the evacuee, but the same all along remained in the possession of his daughter i.e. respondent No.4 and that respondent No.4 illegally and
Forcible encroachment over land—Efficacious statutory remedy must be availed of before filing writ petition.
The court established that a petitioner must come with clean hands and disclose all material facts when invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court, and the existence of an alternative ....
The court emphasized the importance of providing a fair opportunity for the petitioners to be heard before making findings that could affect their rights.
The court ruled that claims for proprietary rights under a void act are unenforceable and emphasized the necessity for full candor in litigation.
The court affirmed that prior judgments are binding unless set aside, and jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be used to challenge such judgments without appropriate legal action.
The court ruled that an unregistered lease does not confer rights, and amendments changing the nature of a petition are impermissible if no enforceable rights exist.
principle of res-judicata- Once the proceedings got concluded by judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Major Chandra Bhan Singh vs. Latafat Ullah Khan (supra), any subsequent proceedings on th....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.