HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No. 3338/2025 Date of pronouncement: 26.11.2025. Date of uploading: 27.11.2025. Sanjay Abrol, age 58 years s/o Sh. Hira Lal Abrol R/o House No. 57, Extn, Nitco Lane Talab Tillo, Jammu. ….Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through :- Mr. A. K. Sharma, Advocate. V/s 01. UT of J&K Through Commissioner/Secretary to Govt. Housing and Urban Development Department, Civil, Sectt. Jammu. 02. Vice-Chairman, Jammu Development Rail Head Complex, Jammu. 03. Secretary, Jammu Development Authority, Jammu. 04. Collector Land Acquisition, Jammu Development Authority, Jammu. …. Respondent(s) Through :- Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate. Coram: HON’BLE MS JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE ORDER(Oral) (26.11.2025) 01. In this petition, petitioner has challenged impugned order dated 22.11.2024, passed by respondent No. 4, whereby the letter of intent of Hall No. 310 AI, measuring 711.56 sft North Block, Bahu Plaza, Jammu, has been cancelled due to non-deposit of the premium of 1st installment i.e. 25% of the bid of Rs. 55.00 lacs i.e., which comes to be Rs. 16,22,500/-, within 45 days from the issuance of letter of intent. The letter of intent was issued in favour of the petitioner, subject to payment premium of Rs. 55.00 lacs as per the schedule given in the letter of intent. Sr.No. 147 2 WP(C) No. 3338/2025 02. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that due to some tragedy at home, the petitioner could not deposit the 25% of the amount, which he had to deposit within 45 days from the date of issuance of the letter of intent dated 20.11.2023. It is further stated that he made representation to respondent No. 2 for redressal of his grievance, wherein he had stated that he is ready to deposit entire amount of premium with interest, but till date no heed has been paid to the representation filed by the petitioner. 03. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would feel satisfied, if instant petition is disposed of, with a direction to respondent No. 2 to consider the representation dated 04.02.2025 within a reasonable period of time. 04. Learned counsel for the respondents is not averse to the proposition being made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 05. In view of the above, instant petition is disposed of, at its threshold, with a direction to respondent No. 2, to consider the representation of the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of one month from the date of passing of this order, by passing a speaking order thereon. (MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI) JUDGE Jammu: 26.11.2025 Sushant Whether the judgment is speaking Yes Whether the judgment is reportable No