Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Vishav Pratap Singh vs Ut Of J&K And Ors on 9 October, 2023
Sr. No. 81
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 47/2022
CM No. 126/2022
CM No. 127/2022
Vishav Pratap Singh .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Nitin Verma, Advocate
Vs
UT of J&K and ors. ..... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Dewakar Sharma, Dy. A.G
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PUNEET GUPTA, JUDGE
ORDER
09.10.2023
1. The petitioner is aggrieved of notice bearing TB/OQ/2021-22/3108
dated 06.01.2022 issued by respondent No. 3-Tehsildar, Bahu whereby he
has been directed to vacate/remove the goods/items placed in the
building/shops of the petitioner, within a period of three days.
2. In the instant petition, the petitioner challenges the Notice dated
06.01.2022, on the following grounds:-
(a) That the impugned notice and action of sealing deserves to be set
aside/quashed on the ground that the same is illegal, arbitrary,
unjust and is against the established principles of law.
(b) That the impugned notice/action deserves to be set aside/quashed
on the ground that the said notice is a result of clear non
application of mind.
(c) That the impugned notice/action deserves to be set aside/quashed
on the ground that the same has been issued in sheer violation of
principles of natural justice as the notice has been issued without
affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.
(d) That the impugned notice/action deserves to be set aside/quashed
on the ground that even though the enquiry was illegal in lieu of
judgment dated 12.11.2021 still at no point of time during the
conduct of the said enquiry no opportunity of being heard was
given to the petitioner. "Audi Alteram Partem" is basic principal
of law that no one should be condemned unheard. The petitioner
was not issued any notice at any point of time by the respondents.
(e) That the impugned notice/action deserves to be set aside/quashed
on the ground that the petitioner has constructed the said complex
and is enjoying the peaceful possession of the same from last 14
years and the act of the respondents in issuing the impugned
notice is clear violation of the fundamental and constitutional
rights of the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the
petitioner is in occupation of the State land and his possession is illegal and
in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court
in LPA No. 77/2021, such illegal occupants are to be removed from the State
land.
4. Mr. Dewakar Sharma, learned Dy. A.G further submits that the
petitioner has no right with regard to the State property and he being illegal
occupant, is required to be dispossessed and the possession of the land is
required to be taken back.
5. It is submitted that the petition can be disposed of as per directions
passed in WP(C) No. 48/2022 as the present matter is identical to that one.
6. Mr. Dewakar Sharma, learned Dy. A.G could not counter the
submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
7. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of in tune
with the order passed in WP(C) No. 48/2022 with the direction to the
respondents that in case petitioner is to be dispossessed from the land in
question (State Land), they shall be at liberty to proceed against the
petitioner in accordance with the provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Public
Premises (Eviction of unauthorized Occupants) Act 1988. Before initiating
proceedings in respect of the property in question, the petitioner shall be
given an opportunity of being heard as provided under law.
8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of along with the
connected application(s).
(Puneet Gupta)
Judge
Jammu
09.10.2023
Tarun
Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable? Yes/No
