BHAGAT RAJINDER KUMAR SAWHNEY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three petitions involve a common point for decision and have, therefore, been heard together. All the petitions relate to certain plots of land situate in Goji Bagh, Srinagar, and form Wasi -dari lands which were leased out to the petitioners in each case for a period of 40 years on the terms and conditions mentioned in the lease as also in the Wasidari Rules. In Bhagat Rajinder Kumars petition the plot in question is plot No. 19 and the lease in this case was granted to the petitioners father in Har 1996. In the case of R. N. Mehta the lease was granted in respect of plot No. 44 on 25th Jeth 1995 which will be sometime in May, 1938. In the case of Amar Nath Mehta the lease was granted in Har 1997 in respect of plot No. 27.

(2.) MR . Sunder Lal appearing for the petitioners has contended that the respondents had no jurisdiction to resume the lands after having accepted rent for a long time and at any rate they had no power to take possession forcibly without the intervention of a Civil Court. The argument is based on the interpretation of the words liable to resumption appearing in rule 25 of the Wasidari Rules. Rule 25 of the Wasidari Rules may be reproduced thus:

(3.) MOREOVER , it seems to us that the order o4 resumption was passed long before the coming into force of the State Constitution and it being, therefore a pre -constitution matter no writ of certiorari can be granted by this Court to quash the same. This position was also conceded by Mr. Sunder Lal but he argued that the right of the lessee to remain in possession is a fundamental right and can, therefore, be protected by the Court under Art. 32(2A) oi the J and K Constitution Application Order.