Ishfaq Mir And Ors vs Union Territory Of J And K And Ors on 25 April, 2025

Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench

Ishfaq Mir And Ors vs Union Territory Of J And K And Ors on 25 April, 2025

Author: Sanjeev Kumar

Bench: Sanjeev Kumar

                                                                                                Serial No. 68
                                                                                                 SUPP. LIST

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

                                     LPA 91/2025 in[WP(C) 1386/2023] CM(2388/2025)

                       ISHFAQ MIR AND ORS.                                                    ...Petitioner(s)

                       Through: Mr. Jahangir Iqbal Ganai, Sr. Advocate with
                                Mr. Abu Bakr Pandit, Advocate
                                                       Vs.

                       UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS.                                   ...Respondent(s)

Through:

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHD YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE

ORDE R
25.04.2025

1. Impugned in the present appeal filed by the appellants under

Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, is an order and judgment dated 17th

February, 2025, passed by the learned Single Judge [“the Writ

Court”], whereby the writ petition filed by the appellants herein

has been dismissed. Before the Writ Court, the appellants herein

had prayed for following reliefs:-

(i) Writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, the
respondent No. 10 be commanded not to cause any kind of
interference with the ownership and possession of the
petitioners over the land measuring 11 Kanals and also the
construction raised by the petitioners thereon, in any manner
whatsoever and remove the encroachment on the Nalah(Kul).

(ii) Writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction,
to the Official respondents to permit the petitioners to fence on
the backyard adjacent to the Nala (Kul) and restrain the
respondent No. 10 so that petitioners is able to protect their
property and privacy and no one tempers with the same in any
manner whatsoever. The petitioners also deserve to be granted
police protection for safeguarding their rights and interests in
the aforesaid property.

(iii) Writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or
direction, to the official respondents to implement the orders
passed by them in letter and spirit without any further delay as
the petitioners have suffered immensely from the last more
than 6 years”.

Arif Hameed
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
29.04.2025

2. So far as reliefs (i) & (ii) are concerned, the same cannot be

granted by this Court in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction

vested under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as the dispute

between the petitioners/appellants herein and respondent No. 10 is

purely private in nature.

3. Mr. Jahangir Iqbal Ganai, learned senior counsel for the appellants,

fairly concedes this aspect of the matter. He, however, would

submit that the Writ Court ought to have entertained the writ

petition in respect of relief (iii), and ensured that the orders passed

by the official respondents from time to time were implemented in

letter and spirit.

4. Having heard learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. Abu Bakr

Pandit, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, we find that

there is apparently a private dispute between the appellants and the

respondent No. 10, with regard to some land falling under Survey

No. 926 min. Both parties are making allegations of encroachment

against each other. The documents on record, however, indicate

that there is some possible encroachment on Nalah/Kul (Gair

Mumkin) and it is this alleged encroached land which has become

bone of contention between the appellants and the respondent No.

10.

5. Having regard to the nature of dispute which has apparently arisen

between the appellants herein and the respondent No. 10, we are of

the considered opinion that the same can be sorted out by directing

the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner himself or through some

revenue officer not below the rank of Assistant Revenue

Arif Hameed Commissioner, to visit the spot and to determine the
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
29.04.2025
encroachment, if any, made by any of the parties, of course after

affording an opportunity of being heard to both the parties. We

further provide that in case, any encroachment is found on spot, the

same shall be removed and property restored to its original

position.

6. Let the Deputy Commissioner himself or through some revenue

officer not below the rank of Assistant Revenue Commissioner,

conclude the exercise as directed above within a period of four

weeks from the date copy of this order is served.

7. In view of aforesaid directions the judgment and order passed by

the Writ Court is set aside and the appeal disposed of.

                                 (MOHD YOUSUF WANI)                        (SANJEEV KUMAR)
                                             JUDGE                                   JUDGE
                         SRINAGAR:
                         25.04.2025
                         "ARIF"




Arif Hameed
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
29.04.2025