Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2017 DAILYLAW 1120 (JK)

NUBY SHARMA v. STATE TH.REVENUE DEPTT.AND ORS.

OWP/970/2017 · 2026-02-23

Sanjay Parihar

body2017

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Sr. No. 04 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case:-OWP No. 970/2017 Nuby Sharma …. Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through:- None V/s State of J&K & Ors. …..Respondent(s) Through:- None CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE ORDER 23.02.2026 None for the petitioner. Earlier also, the counsel appearing for the petitioner had sought instructions as to whether she would like to continue with the petition in light of the compliance report filed by the respondents. Since then, nothing has been heard from the petitioner. The petitioner has chosen not to apprise the Court as to whether she intends to continue with the petition or to assail the compliance report by way of separate proceedings. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in continuing with the proceedings, and that is why, despite the order dated 27.12.2023, no steps have been taken by the petitioner to apprise the Court. Whereas the petitioner had claimed that land under Khasra No. 297, situated at village Jassore, Tehsil R.S. Pura, is being subjected to unabated encroachment that has not been protected by the respondents, whereas the same is a water source for the village pond. According to the respondents, the same is a vacant property which is being possessed by the village people through Custodian Department and is vacant land, that has not been encroached, so much so, no cattle shed is available on the spot. Given the status report and instructions having not been reported by the OWP No. 970/2017 petitioner, it appears that the petitioner has lost interest in prosecuting this petition. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed for want of prosecution Interim direction(s), if any, shall stand vacated. (SANJAY PARIHAR) JUDGE JAMMU 23.02.2026 Diksha