Farooq Ahmed vs State Of J&K And Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 1472 j&K

   THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                      AT JAMMU

                                                      OWP No. 1520/2010

                                               Pronounced on: 16.11.2021

Farooq Ahmed                                      .... Petitioner/Appellant(s)

                                 Through:-     Mr. Jatinder Choudhary,
                                               Advocate

                           V/s

State of J&K and another                                   .....Respondent(s)

                                 Through:-     None


CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE
                                 JUDGMENT

01. The petitioner through the instant writ petition seeks a direction to

the respondents to release cash assistance and free ration as admissible to

Kashmiri migrants in his favour with a further direction to pay him

compensation for causing undue hardship to the petitioner and his family.

02. The petitioner was registered as Kashmiri Migrant in the year 1995

vide order no. RCJ/Regd/DF-1419 dated 10.05.1996. On the basis of this

registration as Kashmiri Migrant, the cash assistance and free ration as

admissible to Kashmiri Migrants was being received by him till 2008. This

disbursement of the cash assistance and free ration to the petitioner along

with some persons was stopped vide order no. DCV/R/C/2263-69 dated

05.10.2007 on the basis of complaint received against the petitioner and

some other migrants by the Tehsildar Vigilance Relief and Rehabilitation.

03. This has constrained the petitioner to approach respondent No. 2 for

release of cash assistance and free ration but he was informed that the relief

in his favour has been stopped and that the Additional Director General of

Police CID has been asked to verify his antecedents.

04. The respondent No. 2 vide his communication dated 23.08.2010 to

Additional Director General Police has stated that during verification, it

was found that the petitioner was not residing in the residential address

given by him i.e., "Set no. 2 Ahata Amar Singh Govt. Flats Panjtirthi,

Jammu. Upon verification, it had also transpired that the quarter which was

allotted to the petitioner was allotted to his relative which remains closed

after Darbar. As the petitioner had sought release of his relief benefits and

given the explanation that he was outside Jammu for his treatment,

therefore, information was sought regarding his stay outside the Valley for

the security reasons.

05. The office of the Inspector General of Police CID J&K Srinagar

conducted the verification of the migrants case of the petitioner as per letter

dated 23.08.2020 and vide his communication dated 08.10.2010, informed

respondent No. 2 that the field verification conducted has revealed that the

petitioner who is about 53 years old and is doing business at Jammu. He

was an Over Ground Worker of JKLF in 1991 and was arrested by BSF on

23.12.1992 and released after 18 months of detention in Kot Balwal Jail,

Jammu. Subsequently, he is reported to have migrated to Jammu in July,

1994. According to the respondents, the petitioner does not have any threat

in the Valley and he is staying in Jammu on his own with his family

consisting of wife, daughter and son.

06. The respondents in their objections further submit that the petitioner

was not genuine migrant, therefore, vide order No. DCV/R/C/2263-69

dated 05.10.2007, the relief benefits in favour of the petitioner and others

were stopped by the Tehsildar Vigilance Relief Organization Jammu. It has

also been established that the petitioner is staying in Jammu at his own and

there is no threat to his family, as such, the relief sought by him was

accordingly, stopped.

07. The migrant is defined under the Jammu and Kashmir Migrant

Immovable Property (Preservation, Protection and Restraint on Distress

Sales) Act, 1997 which means any person who has migrated from Kashmir

Valley or any other part of the State after 1st November, 1989 and is

registered as such with the Relief Commissioner and includes a person

who has not been so registered on the ground of his being in service of the

Government in any moving office, or having left the Valley or any other

part of the state in pursuit of occupation or vocation or otherwise and is

possessed of immovable property at the place from where he has migrated

but is unable to ordinarily reside there due to the disturbed conditions.

08. Admittedly, in this case the petitioner is residing at Jammu is not

because of disturbed conditions in Valley because there is no security threat

to him or his family. In terms of the verification conducted by the CID, it is

clear that the petitioner has moved out of the Kashmir at his own without

any threat to him, therefore, relief benefits were stopped.

09. In view of the aforesaid, there is no merit in this petition and the

same is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Sindhu Sharma) Judge JAMMU 16.11.2021 SUNIL-II Whether the judgment is speaking : Yes/No Whether the judgment is reportable : Yes/No