SHAKEEL AHMAD BHAT Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN pursuance of directions dated 24.09.2012 the status report has been filed explaining as to why 17 encroachments could not be removed. According to the explanation tendered, the aforesaid removal could not take place on account of interim order passed by this Court on 10.10.2006 in CMP no. 1156/2005. A copy of the order has been attached with the status report. Likewise, the submissions have been made in respect of other matters where interim directions were issued in CMP no. 1418/2005.

(2.) MR . Chashoo, learned Additional Advocate General has stated by referring to para 2 of the status report that there is one Mr. Shafat Ahmad who has blocked the Doodganga diversion channel by earth filling but has also filled the detention basis of this channel by earth filling rendering the entire Doodganga diversion channel as redundant. By this act he has exposed the surrounding areas of being submerged at the time of floods. Mr. Shafat Ahmad has further encroached upon the left protection Bund which has been acquired in 1960 's with the width of 33 feet and has been at present reduced to 18 feet only and on the side he has made earth filling upto the level of this protection Bund and has planted fruit bearing trees on spot rendering the bund useless although, according to the affidavit filed by Mr. Shafat Ahmad he has not made any encroachments and the land in his possession has been purchased by him under proper sale deed. There is no order restraining the respondent Department to proceed against any encroacher including Mr. Shafat Ahmad and if the Department finds that he has encroached on public land then it is at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law. A copy of the status report be furnished to the applicants in CMP nos. 1156/2005 and 1418/2006 so that both the applications are disposed of and the interim directions may be rectified accordingly.

(3.) LET the main petition alongwith the aforesaid CMPs be listed on 16.10.2012.