D.C should remove encroachments, if any, of migrants properties

The Delhi High Court has directed the Government of the Jammu and Kashmir State to, every six months, have the properties of the petitioners, Shri BL Wall and others, inspected by the Deputy Commissioner Anantnag Kashmir, and if finds any encroachment thereon, to have the said encroachment removed.

The High Court has also directed the Resident Commissioner, at Delhi, of the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, to, upon the petitioners approaching him, furnish to the petitioners the report of such inspections from time to time.

The Court has also directed the Union of India to use its good offices to ensure compliance of the aforesaid directions by the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir

The order, issued by Justice Rajiv Sahar Endlaw, on April 19 last, said that five petitioners, claiming to be original residents of Kashmir and forced to migrate out of Kashmir for the situation prevailing there, have filed this petition. seeking mandamus to the Union of India and to the Government of State of Jammu and Kashmir to protect their immovable properties at Verinag, Kashmir, from being encroached, or trespassed upon.

The High Court order continues to say Notice of the petition was issued and, vide order dated 25 August, 2005, status quo was directed to be maintained by the Government of State of J & K with respect to the properties of the petitioners, vide order, dated 21st April, 2006, rule was issued and the interim order made absolute Vide subsequent order, dated 3 March, 2011, a direction was issued to the Chief Secretary of the Government of the State of J & K to depute a senior-level officer, viz. Divisional Commissioner, Anantnag, Kashmir, to visit the properties of the petitioners and file a status report, along with the photographs, particularly reporting whether the properties were free from encroachment. Thereafter, again vide order, dated 7 March, 2014, a fresh status report was sought.

The Court order went on to say: The counsel for the State of J&K has not been appearing for the last few dates and does not appear today also. The counsel for the Union of India states that the requisite steps have to be taken by the State Government only. Not finding any description in the writ petition of the properties qua which the petition has been filed, query in that regard has been made from the counsel for the petitioner.

The counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention to the status report, dated 3rd May, 2011, filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag, Kashmir, in this Court, along with its annexure, and states that the same, correctly, describes the properties of all the five petitioners and qua which relief is claimed in this petition.

Though the counsel for the Union of India has drawn attention to the judgement, dated 29th October, 2004, of this Court, earlier, filed by the same petitioners and vide which compensation was directed to be paid to the petitioners but on enquiry whether on payment of such compensation, the title of the petitioners to the properties stands divested from the petitioners into the Union of India, or the State of J&K, states that the petitioners remain the owners of the properties and the compensation was for the loss caused to the superstructure of the properties.

Though ordinarily the petition seeking relief with respect to the immovable property in the State of J&K ought to have been filed in the High Court having territorial jurisdiction over the immovable property but since this petition has remained pending in this Court for the last 11 years and under interim orders in this petition, the properties have been ordered to be protected and further in view of the same very reasons for which the petitioners have been forced to leave their immovable properties in Kashmir and take refuge in Delhi and in the consonance of the spirit of the earlier petitions entertained in this Court at the instance of such migrants from Kashmir, I do not deem it now appropriate to oust the petitioners from this Court, on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. The directions to the State of J & K, in the past, have been conveyed through the Resident Commissioner of the Government of the State of J & K in Delhi and the final direction, if any, in this petition, can, also, be conveyed.

DISCLAIMER:

The views expressed in the Article above are  Jaganath Dhar’s views and kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article. The article belongs to its respective owner or owners and this site does not claim any right over it. Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing."

Courtesy:  Jaganath Dhar Koshur Samachar 2016, May