SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(J&K) 720

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH
WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, J.
S. Saroop Singh & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondent
OWP No. 1885/2017 & IA No. 01/2017
Decided on : 14-12-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Jagpaul Singh
For the Respondent: Sandeep Gupta; Monika Kohli

The State cannot dispossess individuals of property without proper legal processes, affirming the entitlement to compensation for land occupied without due course of law.

Headnote:(A) J&K Land Acquisition Act, 1990 - Section 3-A - Evacuee Property Act, 2006 - Constitution of India - Article 300-A - Displacement and entitlements - Petitioners, being DPs from 1947, claimed compensation for land occupied by Union since 1978, previously allotted for rehabilitation under G.O. 578-C of 1954. Mutations have not been contested. Petitioners' entitlements upheld based on findings of multiple inquiry committees validating their claims and entitling them to rental compensation of Rs. 2.49 Crore plus future assessments as per Land Acquisition Act. (Paras 24, 42, 59, 62)

(B) Right to Property - Constitutional Protection - Court reinforced that deprivation of property cannot occur without following due process of law outlined in Article 300-A. Thus, petitioners cannot be dispossessed of property without legal procedures being duly followed. (Paras 50-54)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner families, refugees from 1947, were allotted land measuring 224 Kanals in 1953 for rehabilitation by the State Government. They remained in possession until forcefully occupied by the Army in 1978, prompting the legal challenge for entitlement to compensation and restitution.

Findings of Court:
The court affirmed petitioners' entitlement to both ownership rights over the land and the assessed rental compensation for the period of usage by the government agencies since 1978.

Issues: Whether petitioners' rights to compensation for forcibly occupied land were violated, and if due process was followed in denying them said rights.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that land granted to displaced persons maintained their legal ownership and rights as per state grants and that the Union's failure to legally acquire the land constituted an illegal forfeiture.

Result: Petition allowed, and the Union of India directed to pay assessed compensation and future payments.

Table of Content
1. displaced persons' rights to compensation for land. (Para 1 , 2)
2. impact of governmental agreements on land rights. (Para 3 , 4)
3. legal validation of land occupancy and rights. (Para 5 , 6)
4. requirements for lawful dispossession of property. (Para 7 , 8)
5. rehabilitation and compensation under law. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 14)
6. government obligations for property rights. (Para 12 , 13 , 15)
7. emphasis on due process in property acquisition. (Para 24 , 50)

JUDGEMENT

1. The instant petition has been preferred by the petitioners on behalf of all the family members/descendents of 24 displaced persons (DPs) of 1947 to whom the land measuring 224 Kanals and 10 Marlas falling under Khasra Nos. 2, 3 and 6 of Village Chatha, Jammu was allotted in the year 1953 by the State Government for their rehabilitation under Government Order No. 578-C of 1954 for vindication of their common rights for getting compensation for the aforementioned land from the respondent-Union of India, which according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is illegally and unlawfully occupied by the respondent-Union of India.

2. The petitioners through the medium of instant petition have sought the following reliefs:-

    "a. Mandamus commanding the respondent no. 5 to assess the compensation to be paid to the petitioners from 01.01.1978 till date by the respondent no. 1 to 4 for the forcible possession over the land measuring 224 Kanals and 10 Marlas of land falling under Khasra no. 2, 3 and 6 of Village Chatha, Jammu which was allotted to the DPs of 1947 in the year 1953 by the State Government for their rehabilitation under Government Order No. 578-C of 1954;

    b. Mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1 to 4 to pay the rental compensation to the petitioners as assessed by the respondent no. 5 for the forcible possession over the land measuring 224 Kanals and 10 Marlas of land falling Under Khasra no. 2, 3 and 6 of Village Chatha, Jammu which was allotted to the DPs of 1947 in the year 1953 by the State Government for their rehabilitation under Government Order No. 578-C of 1954;

    c. Mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1 to 4 to hand over the possession of the land measuring 224 Kanals and 10 Marlas of land falling under Khasra no. 2, 3 and 6 of Village Chatha, Jammu which was allotted to the DPs of 1947 in the year 1953 by the State Government for their rehabilitation under Government Order No. 578-C of 1954 and was forcibly taken over by the respondent no. 1 to 4 or in alternative;

    d. Mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1 to 4 to adopt the due procedure as laid down under J&K Land Acquisition Act for acquisition of land measuring 224 kanals and 10 marlas of land falling under Khasra no. 2, 3 and 6 of Village Chatha, Jammu which was allotted to the DPs of 1947 in the year 1953 by the State Government for their rehabilitation under Government Order No. 578-C of 1954, if they are in need of the same;

    e. And any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may kindly be issued in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents."

Arguments on behalf of the petitioners

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are displaced persons of 1947 from Tehsil Bagh Village Dhare, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) and the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir in its policy to rehabilitate the refugees of 1947, allotted a total area of 224 Kanals and 10 Marlas comprising Khasra Nos. 2, 3 & 6 in village Chatha, Jammu in the year 1953. The case of the petitioners is that the land in question was originally a private land, belonged to the private persons and after coming into force the Big Landed Estates Abolition Act, the same was escheated to the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The further case of the petitioners is that after the allotment of this land to the petitioners and their predecess

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top