Tuesday, 19, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Tilak Raj & Ors vs Sachin Kumar Vaishya & Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 2474 J&K

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2474 J&K
Judgement Date : 29 October, 2025

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Tilak Raj & Ors vs Sachin Kumar Vaishya & Anr on 29 October, 2025

Author: Rahul Bharti
Bench: Rahul Bharti
                                                     Serial No. 12


 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                 AT JAMMU
CCP(S) No. 172/2023

Tilak Raj & Ors.
                                                       .....Petitioners

               Through: Mr. Sandeep Singh, Advocate.

              Vs

Sachin Kumar Vaishya & Anr.
                                                    .....Respondents

               Through: Ms. Nazia Fazal, Assisting Counsel vice
                        Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG for R-1.
                        Mr. Mayank Gupta, Advocate for R-2.

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE

                              ORDER

(29.10.2025)

01. The writ petition-OWP No. 560/2003 titled "Tilak Raj &

Ors. Vs State of J&K & Ors." came to be disposed of by the Hon'ble

Division Bench by virtue of an order dated 22.12.2022 with express

and categoric observations to the effect that land of the petitioners

has been appropriated by the Municipal Corporation Jammu for

development of a park named 'Vijaya' at Nai Basti opposite Peer

Baba, Jammu, way back in 1970 without compensating the owners

of the land in reference. It further came to be observed that even the

Administrative Department, in its communication in the month of

March 2015, directed the processing of the case for land acquisition

as per the revenue records, and to this effect even the Municipal

Corporation Jammu, endorsed the position that requisite funds

were available to meet the cost of acquisition of the subject land.

02. The Hon'ble Division Bench came to give go-ahead to the

Municipal Corporation Jammu as well as the Deputy Commissioner,

Jammu, to acquire the land in question by initiating the process of

acquisition by providing fair compensation for the land in reference

to the petitioners strictly as per the rules governing the field.

03. A writ cause of 2003, even as on date in the month of

ending October 2025, has not seen the closure which is a very sad

state of affairs relating to the manner in which the writ respondents

have taken the indulgence of the Hon'ble Division of this Court as a

matter of ride rather than respect.

04. This contempt petition was filed by the petitioners, all of

whom in the year 2023 were above 70 years of age.

05. Pursuant to order dated 18.09.2024, Statement of facts

to the contempt petition came to be filed by the Deputy

Commissioner, Jammu.

06. In the statement of facts so submitted, there is a

communication dated 30.09.2024 from the end of the Assistant

Commissioner (Revenue), Jammu to the Commissioner, Municipal

Corporation Jammu seeking placement of an indent from Jammu

Municipal Corporation for initiating the acquisition proceedings.

07. The very fact that it is only in response to the contempt

petition that in the name of an exercise the office of the Deputy

Commissioner, Jammu came forward with the issuance of

communication No. DCJ/SQ/Misc/2024-25/3570-71 dated

30.09.2024 to the Municipal Corporation Jammu is a pointer to the

fact that but for the contempt petition even this much

communication would not have been issued from the end of the

office of the Deputy Commissioner, Jammu to the Municipal

Corporation Jammu, which in turn has not bothered to even

respond to the said communication of the office of the Deputy

Commissioner, Jammu.

08. This is a clear-cut case of continuing wilful contempt of

the Hon'ble Division Bench judgment and that constrains this Court

to frame Rule (ROBKAR) against the Deputy Commissioner, Jammu,

namely, Sh. Rakesh Minhas and the Commissioner, Municipal

Corporation Jammu, namely, Sh. Devansh Yadav.

09. Registrar Judicial, Jammu to frame Rule (ROBKAR)

against the above-named two officials and notify them for their

personal appearance in the case on the next date of hearing.

10. List on 18.11.2025.

(RAHUL BHARTI) JUDGE JAMMU 29.10.2025 Bunty

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter