The main legal point established is that the transfer of control and ownership of the land to the Military Department and later to the Union of India, as well as the principle of deemed admission, influenced the court's decision.

JUDGMENT :

1. Through the medium of this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking to quash Notice bearing No.75/ACN/AS/16 dated 10.11.2016 and Notice bearing No.ACN/296/PS/16 dated 15.12.2016 issued by Assistant Commissioner, Nazool, Srinagar, respondent No.5 herein, whereby the petitioners have been asked to show cause as to why they should not be evicted from the land measuring 31 kanals, 10 marlas, 26 sft. falling under Khasra Nos.45, 45/1, 46, situate at Sonwar, Srinagar, being in unauthorized occupation of the public premises in pursuance of Sub Section (1) of Section 4 of J&K Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorized occupants) Act, 1959 and 1988. The petitioners are also seeking a direction to the respondents not to dispossess or evict them from the subject matter, i.e., one acre each of Bungalow Nos.2 & 3 of Raghunath Villa and the land underneath and appurtenant situated at Gupkar Road, Srinagar.

2. The facts as gathered from the writ file are that the land-in-question was leased out to one Shri Ram Nath Chopra for a period of 40 years from 27.10.1907 to 26.10.1947 under the J&K Government Rules of 1905. After that Shri Ram Nath Chopra applied for extension of lease which was renewed for a period of 20 years in respect of four acres of land at a rent of Rs.345.76 with effect from 27.10.1947 to 26.10.1967. It is averred that in terms of Command Order No.273 dated 22.09.1939 of His Highness Maharaja Hari Singh, all the khalsa land within the Badami Bagh Cantonment area including the property-in-question popularly known as Raghunath Villa situated at Gupkar Road, Srinagar was transferred to the control of the Military Department, for which the Revenue (Nazool) Department also accorded no objection. Thus, the control over the property-in-question along with other khalsa lands within the Badami Bagah Cantonment came under the jurisdiction of cantonment authorities. Subsequently, it is averred that in terms of agreement dated 14.01.1956 entered into between the President of India and the State of J&K (now Union Territory) it was agreed upon between the parties that all the properties and assets pertaining to the J&K State Forces including the property-in-question, as they stood on 01.09.1949 shall vest to Union of India. Further, the respondents in Civil Appeal No.4326/1971 filed before the Apex Court had conceded and surrendered to the Union of India vis-à-vis ownership, titled and possession of the entire 56 kanals of land in and around Gupkar and Sonwar localities including the property-in-question. Thus, the orders passed by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.4326/1971 is binding upon the Nazool Department under Article 144 of the Constitution of India.

3. It is averred that the petitioners being the successors-in-interest of their predecessor, i.e., Ram Nath Chopra and S.N. Chopra, executed lease agreement with the Defence Estates Officer in the year 1968 in respect of the subject matter, i.e., Raghunath Villa Nos.2 & 3 regarding rent, its revision etc. Thus, the said property-in-question has been in possession of the petitioners along with their families for the last more than hundred years and they have been using the same for residential purposes. They are also paying the rent, electricity charges, house tax etc. towards the cantonment board. It is submitted that despite the above legal position, the respondents through respondent No.5 have issued the impugned Notice No.75/ACN/AS/16 dated 10.11.2016 and Notice No.ACN/296/PS/16 dated 15.12.2016 asking them to show cause as to why the petitioners herein should not be evicted from the property-in-question being in unauthorized occupation of the same in pursuance of Sub Section (1) of Section 4 of J&K Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorized occupants) Act, 1959 and 1988. Hence, the present writ petition on behalf of petitioners herein.

4. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners argued that since for all practical purposes and for all times to come the khalsa land i