Kartar Singh vs Vijay Kumar Bidhuri
2024 Latest Caselaw 876 j&K

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Kartar Singh vs Vijay Kumar Bidhuri on 1 May, 2024

                                                                Sr.No.02

              HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                            AT JAMMU




                                                        CCP(D) No. 39/2022 in
                                                        [OWP No. 372/2018]
Kartar Singh, age 62 years
S/O Sh. Nand Lal, R/O Village Roun,
District Udhampur.                                         ....Appellant/Petitioner(s)

                 Through :- Mr. Munish Sharma, Advocate
        V/s
1. Vijay Kumar Bidhuri, Commissioner Secretary,
   Revenue Department, UT of J&K
2. Kritika Jyotsna, Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur.
3. Mohd. Syed Khan, Collector Land Acquisition,                    ....Respondent(s)
   Additional Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur
                 Through :- Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG



                                                       CCP(D) No. 40/2022 in
                                                       [OWP No. 363/2018]
 1. Balwant Singh, Aged 33 years,
    S/O Chain Singh, R/O Village Roun,
    District Udhampur.
 2. Majer Singh, Aged 30 years
    S/O Chain Singh, R/O Village Roun,
    District Udhampur.                                   ....Appellant/Petitioner(s)

                   Through :- Mr. Munish Sharma, Advocate

          V/s

 1. Vijay Kumar Bidhuri, Commissioner Secretary, Revenue
    Department, UT of J&K
 2. Kritika Jyotsna, Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur.
 3. Mohd. Syed Khan, Collector Land Acquisition, Additional
    Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur                                 ....Respondent(s)

                   Through :- Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG

                                                         CCP(D) No. 41/2022 in
                                                         [OWP No. 373/2018]

1. Karnail Singh, aged 45 years, S/O Dharam Singh,
   R/O Village Roun Domail, Udhampur.
                                       2                   CCP(D) Nos. 39, 40 & 41/2022




 2. Sumit Singh, Aged 32 years, S/O Dharam Singh,
    R/O Roun Domail,Udhampur.
 3. Ashok Kumar, Aged 38 years S/O Dharam Singh,
    R/O Roun Domail, Udhampur.                               ....Appellant/Petitioner(s)

                    Through :- Mr. Munish Sharma, Advocate

          V/s

 1. Vijay Kumar Bidhuri, Commissioner Secretary, Revenue
    Department, UT of J&K
 2. Kritika Jyotsna, Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur.
 3. Mohd. Syed Khan, Collector Land Acquisition, Additional
    Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur                                       ....Respondent(s)

                    Through :- Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG

       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ATUL SREEDHARAN, JUDGE
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE

                               ORDER(ORAL)

01.05.2024

1. The present contempt petitions have been preferred by the contempt

petitioners for enforcement of the order passed by the Division Bench of

this Court on 09.08.2021. The contempt petitioners' land was acquired.

Their contention is that the compensation was not paid to them. They

approached this Court by way of separate writ petitions, which were

allowed in their favour by a common judgment. The relevant paragraph is

para-7 in which the Coordinate Bench has held that the petitioners were

entitled to compensation under the law and directed the Collector Land

Acquisition, Udhampur to release the award amount, if any, deposited by

the Union of India in favour of the petitioners. However, the same

paragraph also gives the liberty to the respondents (contemnors herein), to

avail remedy before the appropriate forum, if any available. The petitioners

say that in order to defeat this relief granted by the Coordinate Bench, the

respondents filed the references before the District Judge, which are not

maintainable under law. However, they submit that they would prefer to

challenge the references before appropriate forum.

2. Under the circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioners has prayed for

disposal of these contempt petitions with a liberty that in the event, the

references are decided in favour of the contempt petitioners, and the

compensation which has to be paid to the petitioners in the light of

paragraph-7 of the Coordinate Bench's judgment, is not complied with by

the respondents, they be allowed to prefer a fresh contempt petition before

this Court. The prayer is reasonable. The contempt petitions are disposed of

with liberty as prayed for herein above. It is also made clear that the time

taken by the reference Court to decide the references before it shall not be

an impediment to the petitioners' cause on account of limitation. Even

otherwise, this Court has ample power under Article 215 to enforce its

orders ex debito justitiae.

3. The contempt petitions stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

                                                   (Rajesh Sekhri)                      (Atul Sreedharan)
                                                       Judge                                   Judge

           Jammu:
           01.05.2024
           Vijay
                                                 Whether the order is speaking: Yes
                                                 Whether the order is reportable: No