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

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.A. CHOWDHARY
INHABITANTS OF VILLAGE SHUN, SARCHU AND ORS. – Appellant
Versus
UNION TERRITORY OF LADAKH AND ORS. (REVENUE DEPARTMENT) – Respondent
WP(C)/1228/2022



S.No.

Before Notice

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT SRINAGAR

CM No. 3031/2022

WP(C) No. 1286/2022

CM No. 3032/2022

Inhabitants of Village Shun & Ors.

…Petitioner/Appellant(s)

Through: Ms. Nusrat Razak, Advocate

V/s

UT of Ladakh & ors.

…Respondent(s)

Through: Mr. T. M. Shamsi, ASGI

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.A CHOWDHARY, JUDGE.

ORDER

17.06.2022

Petitioners have filed this petition in representative capacity against

the respondents- UT of Ladakh and its functionaries pleading therein that

having common grievance they have filed the petition. It has been pleaded

that they are aggrieved that of the inaction on the part of the respondents

by not demarcating/defining the boundaries of village Shun, Sarchu of

Zanskar areas of District Kargil, where they have been residing since ages

together and have also been earning their livelihood from small Tea

Stalls/Restaurants, as the said village is situated on Leh-Manali, National

Highway.

It was alleged that some villagers of Village Samad Nyoma, District

Leh have been trying to occupy the land in possession of the petitioners

time and again by using muscle power and are also causing obstructions in

their livelihood by operating small tea Stalls, Dhabas and Restaurants and

the official respondents who are requested to take some action failed in

2

doing so. The petitioners have filed OWP No. 998/2015 and this Court had

disposed of that petition directing both the Deputy Commissioners of Leh

and Kargil Districts to convene a meeting of residents of both the villages

and proceed with demarcation of the boundary of the respective villages

and the land adjacent thereto.

It has been further pleaded that in a meeting of the official

functionaries of the respondents on 16.09.2014, it was concluded that the

village Sarchu had not been demarcated and the said village has no

boundaries, as such, both the Deputy Commissioners, Leh and Kargil

decided to refer the dispute to the Divisional Commssioner, J&K

Government Srinagar for redressal of the grievances of the petitioners.

It has been finally prayed that the respondents be commanded to

demarcate and define the boundaries of the village Shun, Sarchu Zanaskar,

Kargil on the basis of the Farman of the then King of Ladakh Takpa

Bumdhey in 1400 A.D, whereby this Village had been gifted to the people of

Shun Zanaskar Kargil and to further restrain the respondents from allowing

the people of Village Samad, Nyoma, Leh or any other person to interfere

and /or cause interference with the peaceful possession of the land of the

petitioners.

Mr. T.M. Shamsi, learned ASGI, who is present in the Court appeared

and submitted that the Farman of King cannot be implemented in view of

legislation with regard to land thereafter and opposed any direction to the

respondents and also questioned maintainability of the petition.

Since the petitioners have already filed OWP No. 998/2015 wherein

this Court had passed elaborate direction for demarcating of the boundaries

3

of the village and the land adjacent thereto and both the Deputy

Commissioners of Leh and Kargil had been directed to conclude their

exercise within eight weeks to twelve weeks from the date of receipt of copy

of the order and both the Deputy Commissioners were directed to direct the

residents of two villages who are now before this Court to maintain the

position on spot.

The petitioners again have filed this petition now on the same set of

facts which they have pleaded in the petition of 2015, which had been

disposed of with positive directions.

The parties, subject matter and the cause of action as agitated in the

earlier petition and the petition filed now are the same, therefore, applying

the principals of res-judicata this petition is not maintainable and is liable

t

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top