Javed Ahmed Matta vs Commissioner And Ors
2026 Latest Caselaw 321 J&K/2

Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench

Javed Ahmed Matta vs Commissioner And Ors on 5 February, 2026

Author: Rahul Bharti

Bench: Rahul Bharti

                                                    Serial No.87
                                             SUPPLEMENTARY CAUSE LIST-3


 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                    AT SRINAGAR

                      CM(M) No. 33/2026


Javed Ahmed Matta                                 ...Petitioner(s)


Through:   Mr. Junaid Amin, Advocate with
           Mr. Manzoor Ahmad Kakroo, Advocate
           Mr. Kainaat Mushtaq, Advocate

                                Vs.


Commissioner and Ors.                             ...Respondent(s)

Through:   Mr. Bikramdeep Singh, Dy. AG with
           Ms. Nowbahar Khan, Assisting Counsel

CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE
                             ORDER

05.02.2026

1. Under the garb of an iron caging placed at the site of

the premises in reference, the petitioner intended to

come up with an intended construction activity

without due building sanction only to be checkmated

by the Srinagar Municipal Corporation's

Establishment resulting in putting the petitioner on a

show cause notice No. SMC/Enf/W/899-903 dated

27.06.2025 objecting to the installation of iron

posts/erection of iron angles over the compound wall.

2. The aforesaid show cause notice came to be replied by

the petitioner stating that no building permission is to

be required at his end from the Srinagar Municipal

Corporation as he is not putting up any construction

by referring to simple steel angles forming a

cage/netting structure admitting of no construction.

3. The purpose stated by the petitioner in setting up the

so-called simple steel angles embedded in the soil and

connecting with each other to create a structure of its

sort, was solely for domestic purposes particularly to

prevent unwanted ingress into the private compound

and for safety and security of the children on the

property without any commercial activity being

involved therein. The petitioner further came to take

an exception to the action of the Srinagar Municipal

Corporation that for the last three months said iron-

steel framed structure was in existence not to be

objected to by any officer of the Srinagar Municipal

Corporation.

4. The reason so cited by the petitioner did not convince

the Srinagar Municipal Corporation which resulted in

issuance of order No. SMC/Enf/W/930-38 dated

01.07.2025, thereby ordering the demolition/pulling down of the illegal/unauthorized construction as

identified in the show cause notice.

5. The passing of order No. SMC/Enf/W/930-38 dated

01.07.2025 by the Srinagar Municipal Corporation

acting through its Enforcement Officer (West), led the

petitioner to prefer an appeal before the Jammu and

Kashmir Special Tribunal which has resulted in its

rejection by way of an impugned order dated

22.01.2026 on file No. JKSTS/7682/2025.

6. The petitioner, in his memo of appeal, intended to

salvage the action carried out on his part by stating

that installation was undertaken and put in place for

indoor domestic sports/recreation facility pertaining to

the family household.

7. Section 329 of Municipal Corporation Act, 2000

provides that any person who intends to use a place

for public resort, recreation, or amusement is first

supposed to apply for a licence from the Commissioner

Municipal Corporation, which, in the present case, is

Srinagar Municipal Corporation and then put the

premises for said recreational purposes.

8. Surely, the petitioner did not have any such

permission/licence prior in hand before putting up the

so-called iron/steel networking over the run of the

boundary wall which in a sense was heightening of the

boundary wall and thus constituted to be a building

exercise at the end of the petitioner which was

supposed to be checked by none other than Srinagar

Municipal Corporation from the point of view of

construction as well as from the point of view of use of

the premises for recreational purposes.

9. The petitioner comes forward with the present writ

petition as if to seek validation of his act of defying the

law by his machination of identifying act on his part of

very innocuous nature. Even in the case, the petitioner

would have made use of the bamboos for the same

very purpose instead of the iron/steel pipes placed and

embedded over the existing boundary walls, the

Srinagar Municipal Corporation would have been well

within its right to check the petitioner before

proceeding ahead with the further improvement and

development of the objectionable structure.

10. This Court finds nothing illegal in the adjudication

of the Special Tribunal and, therefore, is not inclined to grant any indulgence in the writ petition which is

dismissed accordingly.

11. However, in case if the petitioner would apply or

has already applied in a due and proper manner before

the concerned authority including the Srinagar

Municipal Corporation for the purpose for which the

petitioner intended the setting up or raising of

objectionable structure, then the concerned authority

and/or the Srinagar Municipal Corporation shall deal

with the application of the petitioner in accordance

with law of course un-influenced by any observations

made by this Court or for that matter by the Special

Tribunal in the matter.

(RAHUL BHARTI) JUDGE

SRINAGAR:

05.02.2026 Shabroz