Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Abdul Rashid Bhat And Anr vs Union Territory Of J&K & Ors on 2 March, 2024
Author: Rajnesh Oswal
Bench: Rajnesh Oswal
08
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU &KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) No. 849/2022
CCP(S) No. 571/2022
Abdul Rashid Bhat and anr.
..... Petitioner (s)
Through: Mr. Mohammad Ashraf Wani,
Adv.
V/s
Union Territory of J&K & Ors.
..... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Faheem Nisar Shah, GA
Mr. Sajad Geelani, Adv.
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajnesh Oswal, Judge.
ORDER
02.03.2024
1. The relief claimed by the petitioners in the present petition is for
commanding the respondents to preserve the Kahcharie land
measuring 04 kanals and 2 Marlas falling under Survey No. 133
situated at Umerabad Uttersoo and the land be not used for any
other purpose except for the grazing of cattle/sheep/cows. It is
further prayed that respondents be directed not to construct any
government building/infrastructure on the Kacharai land falling
under Survey No. 1333 situated at Umerabad, Uttersoo.
2. Reply stands filed on behalf of the respondents.
3. In the reply filed by respondent No. 2, 6 and 7, it has been stated
that pursuant to order dated 11.06.2022, a team of revenue
Page |2
officials was constituted for demarcation and removal of
encroachment over the land measuring 04 Kanals 02 Marlas
falling under Survey No. 1333 min recorded as Mehfooz
Khacharie and the land measuring 02 Kanals and 05 Marlas was
retrieved on spot and handed over to Panchyat Body through
Sarpanch ad Panchs. It is further stated that a large patch of State
land was retrieved from the encroachers.
4. In the reply filed by respondent No. 1, 3, 4 and 5 it has been
stated that that land measuring 04 Kanals and 02 Marlas under
Survey No. 1333 is Kahcharai land which is never used by any
of the inhabitants including the petitioners for the purpose of
grazing their cattle and the petitioners even admit that they have
planted different trees on this land. It is further averred that even
those who were professionally taking the cattle of the people
during the summer seasons for grazing in the open fields
(behaks) in the upper reaches of the Valley have given up their
profession due to change in the nature of life style owing to
adoption of different economic activities. The Auqaf Committee
Uttersoo has already given in writing that the land may be
provided to Health Department for construction of NTPHC
Building. It is further averred that the Division Bench of this
Page |3
Court in its judgment dated 01.11.2023 in LPA No. 185/2023
has already observed that there are precedents in the past where
Shamilat Deh (Kahcharai) land had been allowed to be
transferred for constitution of public institutions and for public
purpose and as such the Kahcharai land can be used for any
purpose of public importance.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. It is contended by the petitioners that the Kahcharai land is being
used for the purpose of grazing cattle whereas the stand of the
official respondents i.e, 1,3,4 an 5 is that the land has never been
used for grazing cattle and rather the petitioners have planted
trees over the Kahcharai land. It is also the stand of the official
respondents that Auqaf Committee has written to them for
construction of NTPHC building. This court would not like to
make any observation in respect of use of Kahcharai land for the
purpose other than the grazing of cattle etc and as such leaves it
open for the respondent No. 2 to take appropriate decision in
accordance with law so far as the construction of NTPHC
building is concerned. However till any decision is taken by the
respondent No. 2, the status of the land shall be maintained.
Page |4
7. In view of the urgency expressed by the learned counsel
appearing for the respondents of area that the respondents are
suffering because of lack of medical facilities, this Court deems
it proper to direct the respondent No. 2 to take appropriate
decision in that regard.
8. Disposed of as above.
9. CCP(S) No. 571/2022:
10. The contempt is taken on board.
11. In view of the fact that the main petition stands disposed of as
above, the contempt proceedings against the respondents are
dropped and the contempt petition is accordingly disposed of.
(Rajnesh Oswal)
Judge
SRINAGAR
02.03.2024
Aasif
