Virinder Sudan vs Gulzar Ahmed Qureshi And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 2231 j&K

                                                                        Sr. No. 2


      HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                      AT JAMMU
Case:-    CPOWP No. 191/2001

Virinder Sudan                                                       .....Petitioner(s)

                        Through: Mr. Supreet Singh Johal, Advocate.

                  Vs

Gulzar Ahmed Qureshi and others                                   ..... Respondent(s)

                        Through: Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate.

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE

                                      ORDER

(09.10.2023)

01. In the instant contempt petition, the petitioner has alleged the violation of

judgement dated 15.09.2001, in terms whereof while disposing of the writ petition

filed by the petitioner against the notice issued by the respondent-Jammu

Development Authority (for short, 'the JDA') under Section 6(2) of the Jammu &

Kashmir Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1988 (for

short, 'the Act of 1988') dated 31.08.2000 against the petitioner, calling upon him

to remove the encroachment of land measuring 4 kanals 15 marlas covered under

Khasra No. 98 situated at Village Patoli Mangotrian, Jammu, this Court directed

the respondents to restore the possession of the land in question to the petitioner

while leaving it open to the petitioner to seek remedy for damages from the

respondents, if any caused to the petitioner.

02. The petitioner alleged in the contempt petition that the respondents did

not restore the possession of the land taken over from him, thus necessitating the

filing of the contempt petition.

03. Perusal of the record suggests that during the pendency of the instant

contempt petition, this Court appointed a Commissioner in terms of order dated

12.09.2014 in order to figure out as to whether the judgment of this Court has been

violated by the respondents/contemnors or not. The Commissioner appointed by

this Court made a spot inspection on 22.12.2016 in presence of the District

Development Commissioner Jammu, SSP Jammu, Tehsildar JDA Jammu, SDPO

West Jammu, Naib Tehsildar Khas, SHO concerned, the petitioner and one Mr.

Gautam Singh and upon identification of the land by the parties as also after

examining the site plan with an exact scale of disputed land furnished by Naib

Tehsildar Khas, it came to be found that the petitioner is in possession of land

measuring 1 kanals 12 marlas in Khasra No. 585 and 14 marlas in Khasra No. 578,

making the total land in possession of the petitioner as 2 kanals 6 marlas being a

land allotted to the petitioner and the Commissioner further observed during the

said spot inspection that the above named Gautam Singh and his brothers are in

occupation of the land covered under Khasra No. 585, having constructed two

shops, one water cooler and a Samadhi thereon.

The Commissioner had further found that a portion of the land is open

behind the land covered under Khasra No. 585 being used as a garbage land by the

inhabitants, though the petitioner claimed that the above named Gautam Singh and

his brothers are in possession of said portion of land as well, which fact Sh. Gautam

Singh admitted and the said land was found to be without any boundary wall.

04. Objections to the Commissioner's report have been filed by the

petitioner, wherein it is being stated that the same is contrary to the facts and the

existing position on spot, stating further therein that the land in question is under

the occupation of JDA, which had also placed a board thereon the said land and

fenced the same with the partially damaged barbed wire.

On the contrary, Mr. Adarsh Sharma, appearing counsel for the

respondents/contemnors would oppose the contentions of the learned counsel for

the petitioner and would insist that the petitioner was never evicted from the land

so allotted to him even pursuant to the eviction notice dated 31.08.2000, which was

questioned by the petitioner in the writ petition, whereunder the instant contempt

petition has arisen and that the petitioner continuous to be in possession of the land

in question.

05. In view of the aforesaid disputed factual position, it becomes imperative

to ascertain as to whether the petitioner is in actual possession and occupation of

the land allotted to the petitioner in terms of Govt. Order dated 01.02.1991 or that

the said land is under the occupation of the respondents/contemnors, despite the

direction of its restoration to the petitioner passed by this Court in the judgement

dated 15.09.2021 supra.

06. Thus, in order to set at rest the controversy, Mr. Parveen Pandoh, Joint

Registrar (Judicial) and Sh. Prem Sagar, Secretary, High Court Legal Services

Committee are appointed as the Commissioners for making a spot inspection of the

subject matter and to submit a report thereof by or before the next date of hearing.

The fee of the Commissioners is fixed as Rs. 50,000/- to be payable by the

petitioner and the respondents/contemnors and to be shared equally by the

Commissioners.

07. The Commissioners, shall in the process of conducting the spot

inspection of the land, be provided the assistance of Tehsildar JDA, Jammu by the

respondents/contemnors and the inspection be conducted in presence of the parties

or their authorized/nominated representatives. The Commission be executed by the

Commissioners after giving an intimation thereof in advance to Mr. Supreet Singh

Johal, Advocate and Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate, appearing counsel for the

parties.

08. List for further proceedings and continuation on 18.10.2023.

09. Copy of this order be furnished to the Commissioners appointed by this

Court as also to the counsel appearing for the parties.

(JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE JAMMU 09.10.2023 Shivalee