Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
Taxi Operators And Owners vs Union Territory Of Ladakh Through on 11 July, 2025
Serial No. 58
REGULAR CAUSE LIST
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) No. 1578/2025
CM No. 4021/2025
1. Taxi Operators and Owners ...Petitioner(s)
Cooperative Union Kargil
Through its President:
Ghulam Nabi
S/o Haji Hussain
R/o Chortanchan Hagnis, Kargil
Age: 60 years
Union Territory of Ladakh
Pin Code: 194109
2. Kargil Bus Operators
Cooperative Association
Through its President:
Ghulam Hussain
S/O Mohd. Raza
R/o Yokma Koron Gund,
Mangalpore Kargil
Age: 61 years
Union Territory of Ladakh
Pin Code: 194105
Through: Mr. Mustafa Haji, Advocate
(Through Virtual Mode)
Vs.
1. Union Territory of Ladakh through ...Respondent(s)
its Chief Secretary Civil Secretariat,
Leh: 194101
2. Deputy Commissioner Kargil/ Chief
Executive Officer Ladakh
Autonomous Hill Development
Counsel Kargil: 194103.
Page 1 of 7 WP(C) No. 1578/2025
3. Executive Officer, Municipal
Committee, Kargil: 194103.
4. Executive Engineer, PW (R&B),
Division, Kargil: 194103.
Through: Mr. T. M. Shamsi, DSGI with
Mr. Faizan Ahmad Ganai, CGC.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal, Judge.
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
01. Through the medium of the instant petition, filed
under the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
the petitioners, who claim to be the Presidents of Taxi
Operators and Owners Cooperative Union Kargil and Kargil
Bus Operators Cooperative Association respectively, have
assailed order dated 5th June, 2025, whereby they have been
directed to immediately clear/ dismantle the unauthorized
structures, if any, within the premises of the concerned Big
Bus Stand/Mini Bus Stand/Tata Mobile Stand, Taxi Stand
etc. which, according to the respondents fall within the
alignment of the construction work of link road etc. as
intimated by the Executive Engineer, PW (R&B), Division
Kargil, for executing the said works, without any hindrance.
02. The matter was listed before this Court on 8th July,
2025, on which date, while issuing notice to the respondents,
Page 2 of 7 WP(C) No. 1578/2025
the learned counsel representing the respondents was directed
to have instructions in the matter, as the Court was prima
facie of the view that order impugned lacked specific details
regarding unauthorized structure sought to be demolished. In
absence of specific details of unauthorized structures, the
petitioners are unable to implement the aforesaid order, as
they are not aware as to which structure is required to be
dismantled/ removed.
03. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended
that the impugned order is arbitrary, vague and has been
issued without due application of mind, as it does not specify
the structures, which fall within the realm of illegal structures.
Furthermore, it has been contended that no prior notice or
intimation was given to the petitioners, who claim to be in
lawful possession of the premises in question based on
allotments made by the respondents, against which they are
paying annual fee.
04. It is further submitted that the construction of a new
link road adjacent to the main road, where the present
transport stands are situated, would be of little utility and
would only result in the shrinking of already congested space,
thereby displacing the petitioners and affecting thousands of
commuters, who rely on the said location due to its proximity
to the main market of Kargil. It is the further case of the
Page 3 of 7 WP(C) No. 1578/2025
petitioners that the stand as on date, accommodates the Taxis,
Tata Mobiles, Buses and Mazdas and together these feed the
families of hundreds of the people, who are dependent on them
and the current location is feasible for thousands of the people
coming from Kargil and elsewhere, who get down and board
these vehicles at the place in question and in a way affect the
common people who do not have any other mode of
transportation, other than these vehicles.
05. It is also pleaded that the impugned demolition order
was passed without issuing a show cause notice to the
petitioners and without granting them an opportunity of being
heard, thereby violating principles of natural justice. On this
count also, the order impugned cannot sustain the test of law
and is liable to be quashed.
06. The petitioners have also questioned the basis of the
alleged unauthorized status of the structures, asserting that
these were erected with the prior knowledge and consultation
of the respondents, pursuant to proper allotments and annual
fee payments. On this ground also, the impugned order, being
non-speaking and lacking reasons, is not sustainable in the
eyes of law and liable to be set aside.
07. By virtue of order dated 8th July, 2025, this Court
directed Mr. T. M. Shamsi, learned Deputy Solicitor General of
Page 4 of 7 WP(C) No. 1578/2025
India, to have instructions in the matter, as to which
structures fall within the realm of unauthorized constructions,
sought to be demolished/dismantled through the medium of
the impugned order of demolition. Mr. Shamsi, learned Deputy
Solicitor General of India, however, could not satisfy the Court
on this aspect and agreed that the impugned order lacks
necessary particulars. He, however, submitted that the
respondents propose to demolish only those structures which
are coming in the alignment of the proposed link road and that
such structures have already been earmarked.
08. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and
perused the material on record.
09. From a bare perusal of the impugned demolition
order dated 5th June, 2025, issued by the Executive Officer,
Municipal Committee, Kargil, it transpires that the petitioners
have been directed to clear unauthorized structures/trees
falling within the alignment of the proposed construction “Link
Road from Fatima Chowk to Iqbal Bridge Road along the
riverbank, including seating/viewing decks at intervals.”
10. The said order directs immediate dismantling of
structures within the premises of concerned Big Bus
Stand/Mini Bus Stand/Tata Mobile Stand, Taxi Stand etc.
allegedly impeding the proposed development work. This
Page 5 of 7 WP(C) No. 1578/2025
Court finds merit in the contention of the petitioners that the
impugned order fails to specify the exact structures which
according to the respondents are unauthorized. It was
incumbent upon the respondents to provide such details or,
at the very least, supply the report of the Executive Engineer,
PW(R&B) Division, Kargil, which formed the basis for passing
of the impugned order.
11. The absence of specific details renders the impugned
order vague, ambiguous, and incapable of being implemented.
It reflects lack of due application of mind and fails to meet the
minimum threshold required under law for such
consequential directions involving demolition and possible
displacement.
12. Accordingly, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ
petition is allowed, and the impugned order dated 5th June,
2025, passed by the Executive Officer, Municipal Committee,
Kargil, is quashed. It is, however, made clear that this Court
has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claims of
either party. The respondents are at liberty to initiate
appropriate proceedings, including issuance of a show cause
notice to the petitioners, specifically indicating the structures
alleged to be unauthorized, if any, falling in the alignment of
the proposed construction i.e. “Link Road from Fatima Chowk
to Iqbal Bridge Road along the riverbank, including
Page 6 of 7 WP(C) No. 1578/2025
seating/viewing decks at intervals.” Any action, if warranted,
shall be taken after following due process of law and after
affording the petitioners a reasonable opportunity of being
heard and filing a response to the show cause notice.
13. The writ petition, along with connected
miscellaneous applications, stands disposed of on the above
terms.
(Wasim Sadiq Nargal)
Judge
SRINAGAR:
11.07.2025
“HAMID”
❖ Whether the judgment is Reportable? Yes/No.
❖ Whether the judgment is Speaking? Yes/No.
Page 7 of 7 WP(C) No. 1578/2025