Back
SANJEEV KUMAR, WASIM SADIQ NARGAL
Amina Begum – Appellant
Versus
State of J And K – Respondent
The legal document emphasizes that the State cannot claim adverse possession over land that belongs to its citizens when such land is under unauthorized occupation. The court clarifies that the State's occupation without proper legal process does not extinguish the property rights of the owner. Furthermore, the document underscores that delay or latches on the part of the property owner cannot be used as a defense to deny rightful compensation or restitution for the property unlawfully occupied by the State. The court also highlights that property rights are fundamental and recognized as human rights, which must be protected under constitutional provisions.
The decision directs the authorities to either return the land to the rightful owner or proceed with acquisition in accordance with the relevant land acquisition laws, ensuring that fair compensation, including rental for the period of occupation, is provided. The ruling reaffirms that the State’s unauthorized occupation does not confer ownership rights and that the owner retains ongoing recourse to seek justice, regardless of the passage of time.
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev, J. - This appeal under Clause 12 of Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18.03.2019 passed in OWP No. 951/2012 titled Mst. Amina Begum Vs. State of J&K & Ors., whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking compensation for the land measuring 37 kanals and 8 marlas situated at village Chaki Sheera Tehsil Khan Sahab District Budgam falling under different Khasra numbers under unauthorized occupation by the Department of Horticulture, has been dismissed.
2. The said writ petition of the petitioner has been dismissed primarily on two grounds:
(i) that the writ petition involves determination of complicated disputed questions of fact which cannot be gone into by the writ court in exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction vested under Article 226 of the Constitution of India;
(ii) that there has been delay of about 54 years in approaching the court and therefore, writ petition is hit by delay and latches.
3. Before adverting to the grounds of challenge urged by Mr. Qayoom, learned counsel for the appellant, it is necessary to give brief resume of the factual antecedents leading to filing of the petition.
4. As is evident from the writ
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
