Back
JAVED IQBAL WANI
Aziz Wani – Appellant
Versus
J&K Special Tribunal Srinagar – Respondent
ORDER :
1. In the instant petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners herein have prayed for the following reliefs:-
(ii) Mandamus, commanding the respondents not to give effect to the above said orders impugned in this writ petition and also not to interfere into ownership and possession of the writ petitioners over the land measuring 14 Kanals and 18 Marlas bearing Survey No. 743/133 situated at village Sindhu, Shirmal Teh. Shopian.”
2. The facts under the shade and cover of which the reliefs aforesaid have been prayed by the petitioners would reveal that the predecessor-in-interest of respondents 3 and 4 herein, had filed an application before Assistant Commissioner (Collector Agrarian Reforms), P
The court upheld the jurisdiction of revenue authorities under the Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act, affirming their findings on land ownership and possession as valid and within their competen....
The judgment established the authority of Revenue Officers to evict unauthorized occupants and restore possession summarily under Section 27 of the J&K Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976, and clarified that ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appeal under Section 20 of the Act of 1975 was not maintainable as the order was passed under Section 9-A, which was non-appealable. The j....
Supervisory jurisdiction is limited to ensuring tribunals act within their authority and does not permit re-assessing evidence. Once land is legally acquired and possession taken by the state, subseq....
The entitlement to proprietary rights under the J&K Migrant Immovable Property Act, 1997 and the issuance of a writ of mandamus to enforce such rights.
The challenge to the permission under Section 54 of the Ordinance paled into insignificance as the sale deed was already executed and challenged before the Civil Court, and the authorities were not o....
The High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 is discretionary and should not be exercised where an alternative remedy exists, especially in cases involving disputed facts.
The judgment emphasizes the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to entertain suits challenging orders under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, and the binding nature of orders upheld by the H....
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
