HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) No. 277/2022
CM No. 745/2022
Zaina Begum and others .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Shah Ashiq Hussain, Advocate and
Mr. Lone Altaf, Advocate
Vs
UT of J&K and others ..... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. M. A. Chashoo, AAG
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, JUDGE
ORDER
25.02.202201. The petitioners claim that they are in occupation of Kahcharai land under Survey No. 414 for the last more than thirty years, over which it is alleged that some construction has been raised. The Revenue Authorities, by virtue of impugned notice dated 12.02.2022, asked the petitioners to demolish the structures standing on the said Kahcharai land.
02. The case of the petitioners is that in terms of the provisions of Section 133(2)(c) of the Land Revenue Act, a representation has already been moved with the official respondents offering them proprietary land in exchange of Kahcharai land, which is under their occupation. It is stated that till such time as the representation of the petitioners is considered in terms of Section 133(2)(c), the official respondents may be restrained from taking any coercive action against them.
03. While it may be true that in terms of Section 133(2)(c), the person who is in illegal occupation of the land, which is used for grazing purposes can be evicted, however, the said section also envisages that the said person may offer suitable equivalent area in exchange from out of his proprietary land in the same village, failing which the Revenue Officer concerned is authorized to evict the owner and dismantle the structure erected by such a person.
04. Notwithstanding the aforementioned provisions, one cannot lose sight of the directions which have been issued by the Apex Court in the case of "Jagpal Singh and others Vs State of Punjab and others" reported in (2011)11 SCC 396, wherein directions have been issued by the Apex Court to evict unauthorized occupants inter-alia from Kahcharai land throughout the country.
05. The relief prayed for by the petitioners in the present petition, therefore, would come in direct conflict with the directions issued by the Apex Court in Jagpal Singh's case supra, which makes no exception from eviction of unauthorized occupants of Kahcharai land, much less does it permit the authorities to take the land in exchange of Kahcharai land.
06. Be that as it may, no such direction as is prayed for by the petitioners can be given in the present petition. The petition is found to be without any merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dhiraj Singh Thakur)
Judge
Srinagar 25.02.2022
No comments:
Post a Comment