GHULAM MOHAMMAD SHEIKH Vs. STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has questioned the Government Order No.142-HME of 2007 dated 12.3.2007, whereby the claim of the petitioner for the construction of a shop within the complex of Mirza Mohammad Afzal Beig Memorial Hospital, Anantnag (for short MMABM Hospital) came to be rejected by respondent No. 1. He has also prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to allow him to reconstruct the shop by treating that the said site has been allotted to him for a period of 40 years in terms of the mandate of Jammu & Kashmir Land Grants Act and the rules framed thereunder and also pay Rs.10 lacs as compensation for the loss sustained by him due to the illegal demolition of his shop and destruction of drugs by the respondents.

(2.) Precisely the case of petitioner is that vide order dated 19.2.1997 he was permitted to open a Fair Price Shop within the complex of MMABM Hospital. He constructed the shop, purchased drugs and was selling the same. However, the respondents cancelled the said permission order vide dated 7.4.1997 and demolished the shop of petitioner thereby he sustained great loss. Thereafter under Secretary to Government, Health & Medical Education Department made approval vide letter dated 29.5.2000 addressed to the Director Health Services for opening of a Fair Price Shop in the said complex, but before he could act on the said letter, it came to be challenged before this Court by the medium of OWP No.276/2000 and the execution of said letter came to be stayed. Thereafter vide order dated 4.8.2000 the said writ petition came to be dismissed and interim direction came to be vacated. He constructed the shop and also moved an application before respondent No.4 for fixation of rent. It failed to do so, constrained the petitioner to file OWP No.509/2002 before this Court. The application moved by the petitioner for amendment of the writ petition on the allegation that the shop came to be demolished on 15.11.2002 and drugs worth rupees ten lacs came to be destroyed, came to be allowed and, accordingly, he filed the amended writ petition. The said petition came to be disposed of vide judgment dated 8.9.2006 with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of petitioner. The respondents failed to comply the directions, constrained the petitioner to file contempt petition No.398/2006 and the same came to be dismissed with liberty to him to challenge the consideration order, if advised. Thus, by the medium of present writ petition the petitioner has challenged the consideration order on the grounds taken in para-24 of the petition.

(3.) The respondents have resisted the petition on the ground that the sanction came to be rescinded vide Government Order No.375-HME of 1997 dated 7.4.1997. Thereafter the construction raised by him came to be removed. The petitioner has also committed the trespass and the trespassers cannot claim any right of protection. Respondent No.3 has no authority to allot any site in favour of any person not to speak of petitioner enabling him or any other person to construct shop in the premises of the said hospital for selling of medicines. The petitioner has based the foundation of his case on the letter dated 29.5.2000. The said letter is fabricated one and the petitioner deserves to be dealt with in accordance with law.