Back
JAVED IQBAL WANI
Ghulam Mohammad Wani – Appellant
Versus
Government of J&K – Respondent
ORDER :
1. In the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:
ii) By issuance of a 'Writ of Mandamus', or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, the Respondents be directed to pay compensation in favour of the Petitioners for the illegal occupation of their aforesaid property for decades;
iii) By issuance of a 'Writ of Prohibition, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, the Respondents be prohibited from transferring the aforesaid landed property of the Petitioners to the Respondent No.8 or any other Government Department Corporation.
2. Before proceeding to advert to the petition in hand, a brief background as emerges from the perusal of the petition would reveal that the petitioners initially here
The judgment emphasizes the principle of the rule of law and the constitutional right against deprivation of property without due process, as enshrined in Article 300A of the Constitution.
The State must compensate landowners for land acquired for public use, as the right to property is a constitutional right that cannot be extinguished by delay or adverse possession.
The fundamental right to property cannot be disregarded, and citizens cannot be divested of their land without due process, even if there is a delay in approaching the court.
The court emphasized that land acquisition must follow due process, and failure to do so renders the acquisition invalid, protecting the property rights of individuals.
Public authorities must follow statutory procedures for land acquisition; failure to do so violates constitutional rights.
The lawful possession of land cannot be violated by the State without due process; failure to acquire legally results in trespass, warranting restoration or formal acquisition proceedings under const....
Where the deprivation of property without sanction of law is admitted and clearly established, there is no difficulty in applying above principle and, as such, a petition for compensation cannot be d....
Extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is discretionary and can be denied due to unreasonable delay in seeking relief.
The State cannot plead adverse possession in respect of the land of its citizens under its unauthorized occupation, and delay and latches cannot be used to deny compensation to the citizens deprived ....
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
