Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Inhabitants Of Village Singhpora vs Ut Of J&K And Others on 7 February, 2024
Author: Sanjay Dhar
Bench: Sanjay Dhar
Sr. No. 247
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 202/2024
Inhabitants of Village Singhpora .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Chattroo Kishtwar Th. Roshan Lal
and others
q
Through: Mr. N. D. Qazi, Advocate.
vs
UT of J&K and others ..... Respondent(s)
Through: Ms. Nazia Fazal, Advocate vice
Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE
ORDER(ORAL)
07.02.2024
1. The main grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents have not
implemented the judgment of this Court passed in earlier round of
litigation in writ petition bearing WP(C) No. 977/2023, whereby vide
order dated 24.04.2023 the following directions were issued to the
respondents:-
(i) That the NHIDCL i.e. the General Manager (P) NHIDCL, PMU-Kishtwar
shall, in the light of representation made by the petitioners and the decision
taken by the competent authority of Land Acquisition (CALA) Kishtwar in
this meeting dated 06.11.2022, take up the matter with M/s TPF Getinsa
Euro Studios in association with Rodic Consultants Pvt. Ltd. To ensure
that while preparing the detail survey, endeavour shall be made to avoid
agricultural and residential property in the area as far as practicable.
(ii) That any private land required for the construction of the road shall be
formally acquired in accordance with law in vogue wherein the aggrieved
interested persons shall have an opportunity to file their objections and
object to the acquisition of their immoveable properties.
(iii) Ordered accordingly.
2. It seems that the petitioners had filed a contempt petition alleging
therein that their representation was not considered by the respondents
in accordance with the aforesaid directions of the Court.
3. While filing statement of facts, the respondents produced order dated
03.04.2023 whereby representations of some of the inhabitants of the
concerned village were addressed by the respondents.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that consideration
order dated 03.04.2023 has been passed prior to the passing of the
order in the earlier round of litigation between the parties, therefore,
the same does not take care of the concerns of the petitioners, which
has compelled them to knock the doors of this Court once again.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that the
petitioners would feel satisfied if a direction is issued to the
respondents to consider the grievance of the petitioners as they have
projected in the instant writ petition and pass a reasoned order thereon
within some specific period of time.
5. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a
direction to the respondents to treat the same as a representation on
behalf of the petitioners and take appropriate action in accordance with
the law and the rules holding the field and in light of the observations
of this Court made in the aforequoted order in the earlier round of
litigation between the parties expeditiously, preferably within a period
of eight weeks from the date a copy of this order along with the copy
of the writ petition is furnished to the respondents by the petitioner.
6. It is made clear that while according consideration to the
representation of the petitioners, the respondents shall give personal
hearing to the affected parties. It is also made clear that the
respondents shall not take over any property belonging to the
petitioners except in accordance with law.
7. Disposed of.
(SANJAY DHAR)
JUDGE
Jammu
07.02.2024
Sahil Padha
Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No.
Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No.
