MST. NAZRUT Vs. SONAMARG DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has sought a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to demolish the single storied structure raised by them on the land of the petitioner comprising Survey No. 163, situate at Sonamarg, Tehsil Kangan, District Ganderbal. The petitioner has also sought a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to remove the entire debris from the land of the petitioner and to forthwith withdraw from the land of the petitioner. The petitioner has also prayed that the respondents be burdened with heavy costs.

(2.) It appears that the petitioner had purchased land measuring four Kanals comprised in Survey No. 163, situated at Sonamarg, Tehsil Kangan, District Ganderbal in terms of a legally valid Sale Deed. The land has been duly mutated in the name of the petitioner, which fact is substantiated by the revenue extracts issued on 10.09.2009 placed at annexure 'A' on record of this writ petition. It is averred in the writ petition that during winter season the petitioner could not, and did not, visit her land and that a week back from the date of institution of the present writ petition, she asked her son to visit the land in order to prepare a site plan for raising a suitable construction thereon. It is submitted that on reaching the spot, the son of the petitioner found that the official respondents without any right, title or interest in the land in question, and as an act of trespass, had constructed a single storey structure on the land of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner's son took some photographs of the said structure raised by the official respondents without permission and at the back of the petitioner, which are placed on record of this writ petition. The petitioner's son found that the structure so illegally and un-authorizedly raised on the petitioner's land was not occupied by any person at that time the petitioner's son visited the spot. The petitioner through her son made a request to the Deputy Commissioner, Ganderbal, for demolishing the construction in question, but all in vain. It is further submitted that the respondents have neither acquired the land nor have paid any compensation to the petitioner and, therefore, the act of the respondents is illegal and actually tantamounts to a criminal trespass. It is submitted that the petitioner had fenced the land by barbed wire erected on poles and had also constructed two tin sheds on the land, besides dumping building materials for making constructions thereon.

(3.) On 03.04.2010, notice was issued to the respondents for filing objections, and parties were directed to maintain status quo on the spot. Besides, in order to ascertain the actual position obtaining on the spot, it was thought proper to appoint a Commissioner in the matter to visit the spot and make a report. Accordingly, Mr. Jawad Ahmad, the then Joint Registrar (Judicial) of this Court was appointed as Commissioner. The Commissioner, after inspecting the spot, filed a detailed report, which forms part of the record of this writ petition.