Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
Arshad Shafi vs Union Territory Of J And K And Ors on 18 August, 2025
Author: Rajnesh Oswal
Bench: Rajnesh Oswal
Sr. No. 20
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 1915/2025 CM(5078/2025)
ARSHAD SHAFI ...Petitioner(s)/appellant(s)
Through: Ms. Mehreen Altaf, Advocate
Vs.
UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS ...Respondent(s)
Through: Ms. Maha Majeed, Assisting Counsel
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
ORDER
18-08-2025
On August 12, 2025, this Court had passed the following
order:
“Heard.
Notice.
Notice regarding stay.
Served with an advance copy, Mr. Faheem Nissar Shah,
learned GA, accepts notice and prays for a short
accommodation to seek instructions and/or submit response.
Adjourned to 18.08.2025
Meanwhile, status quo, as it exists today, shall be
maintained. This, however, shall not preclude the
authorities to proceed and pass an order in terms of
Section 7(3) of the Act, if so advised.”
Today, learned counsel for the respondents, at the outset,
submits that the necessary order in terms of Section 7(3) of the
Jammu and Kashmir Control of Building Operations Act (COBA),
1988 has since been passed and, therefore, the petition at hand is
rendered infructuous.
However, to the contrary, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that although the order passed under Section 7 is appealable
under Section 13 of the Act which postulates a period of seven days
to avail the remedy to appeal. Whereas, with reference to the order
dated August 14, 2025, she submits that authorities have directed the
petitioner to demolish the alleged structure within a period of four
days.
Thus, she asserts that apparently the time within which the
petitioner is required to demolish the alleged illegal structure is
erroneous, for once the statute provides a period of seven days to the
person aggrieved, by an order under Section 7, any direction vide an
order passed under Section 7 to carry out demolition etc within less
than seven days is apparently misconceived and erroneous.
At any rate, she submits that the said order was passed on 14 th
August, 2025 and the following three days i.e., 15 th, 16th & 17th
August happened to be the holidays and, therefore, even as per the
order dated August 14, 2025, the period of four days would be
reckoned from today.
Be that as it may, she submits that the petition at hand is
rendered infructuous and the same be disposed of as such with
liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal against an order
dated August 14, 2025. However, she submits that the authorities be
directed not to demolish the alleged structure for a period of one
week from today to file an appeal under Section 13 of the Act along-
with an application for interim relief.
The prayer made is not opposed by the learned counsel for the
respondents.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of as having rendered
infructuous. However, no coercive measures against the petitioner
shall be taken in terms of order dated August 14, 2025 for a period of
seven days from today.
(RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI)
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
SRINAGAR
18-08-2025
Shameem H.