GHULAM MOHAMMAD LONE Vs. UT OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the owners of land measuring 03 kanal 04 marlas comprising Survey Nos.766, 769, 786 and 788 in Village Jawbrara Awantipora on National Highway. The petitioners claim to have had established 'Bitumen Hot Mixing Plant' in the year 2009 after obtaining requisite permission. It is stated by the petitioners that in the year 2014, the respondents established District Police Lines for newly created District Police Lines at Awantipora and without following any process prescribed by law, the respondents forcibly occupied the land of the petitioners resulting in closure of their business. In the year 2015, the respondents took a decision to allot alternative land in exchange for the land of the petitioners from out of State/kahcharai/grazing land allotted to the department and in respect of that, the respondent No.3 addressed a communication dtd. 18/8/2015 to the respondent No.2. It is stated that the demarcation of the land which is in occupation of the District Police Lines, Awantipora was conducted through revenue officials and it came to fore that the proprietary land measuring 03 kanals and 04 marlas comprising Survey Nos.766-min, 769-min, 786-min and 788-min owned by the petitioners falling between the approach road leading to the DPL, Awantipora adjacent to ATM, Masjid Sharif DPL, Awantipora, in and around Sentry post, is in actual possession of DPL, Awantipora and the respondents were not in a position to vacate the above mentioned land due to security reasons and, as such, the respondent No.3 recommended that an equal area of land measuring 03 kanals 04 marlas be exchanged with the kahcharie land allotted to respondents out of under Survey No.761-min situated outside the boundary walls of DPL Awantipora. A similar communication was also issued to the petitioners.

(2.) It is stated that the respondents have neither provided a suitable land in exchange nor any compensation for the damages/business loss suffered by the petitioners has been assessed/paid to the petitioners, as such, they have prayed for directing the respondents to process their case for providing land in exchange out of Survey No.761-min, equal to three times the area of land acquired compulsorily from the petitioners and declare it to be the proprietary land under Sec. 133 of Land Revenue Act, 1996 and further the respondents be directed to assess the loss caused to the petitioners due to forcible closure of their hot mix plant and in the alternative, the respondents be directed to process their case for compensation under Land Acquisition act.

(3.) The petition has been opposed by the respondents by filing the response thereto. In the response filed by respondent No.2, it has been stated that the alleged indenting department has not placed any indent with respect to the acquisition of landed estate of the petitioners, as a result of which no acquisition proceeding could be undertaken and also the petitioners never approached for redressal of their grievances. It is further stated that the respondent No.3 has requested for the exchange of proprietary landed estate of the petitioners with Kahcharai land at District Police Lines, Awantipora, which correspondence seems to have been conveyed to the petitioners vide communication dtd. 26/8/2015. It is further stated that pursuant to the directions of this Court, the claim of the petitioners in respect of the exchange was rejected as the exchange could not be opted after the Re-organization Act has come in to operation, as the exchange solely rests on the provisions contained in Sec. 133(2) of the Land Revenue Act which was existing prior to its amendment vide S.O 3808 (E) dtd. 26/10/2020. After the above mentioned amendment, no exchange is permissible and the Deputy Commissioner has no power to accept any such offer.