S. No. 05 Regular Cause List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR LPA No. 333/2024 In WP(C) No. 1341/2024 Mohammad Aslam Chohan and Anr. …Appellant/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Bakhat Parvaiz, Advocate Vs. Union Territory of J&K and Ors. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. M.M Khan, Advocate Ms. Shagufta Maqbool, Advocate vice Mr. T.M Shamsi, DSGI CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE O R D E R 30.04.2025 1. This Letters Patent Appeal filed under Clause 12 of Letters Patent by the appellants is directed against an order dated 27.06.2024 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court [“the Writ Court”] in WP(C) No.1341/2024 whereby the Writ Court has directed the respondents to treat the writ petition as representation on behalf of the respondent No.5/writ petitioner and accord consideration to the same strictly in conformity with the rules and as per the law within a period of six weeks. 2. The appellants herein, who claim to have interest in the land which was subject matter of the writ petition filed by respondent No.5, were not the party before the Writ Court and have, thus, filed this appeal by leave before this Court, challenging the impugned order, primarily, on the ground that the appellants, who have interest in the land subject matter of the writ petition, have not been heard in the matter. 3. Mr. Bakhat Parvaiz, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, would submit that the appellants reasonably apprehend that under the garb of the directions passed by the Writ Court, respondent No.5 may in connivance with concerned revenue officials get the benefit of the payment of compensation for acquisition of land to the exclusion of the appellants. 4. Mr. M.M Khan, learned appearing counsel for respondent No.5, however, brings to our notice a communication dated 19.02.2025 written by Tehsildar, Uri, to SDM Uri; a perusal whereof indicates that the grievance projected by respondent No.5 in the writ petition has been considered at the level of Tehsildar along with three other officers and report has been submitted to the SDM Uri for further necessary action. 5. The report of Tehsildar dated 19.02.2025, is prima facie, not adverse to the interest of appellants. Communication is taken on record. 6. Be that as it may, having regard to the fact that the Writ court has not determined the rights of parties on merits and has left the matter to be considered by the official respondents, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this appeal by providing that the appellants herein, who claim to have interest in the land subject matter of writ petition, shall be heard by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Uri, who has to take a decision in the matter. The appellants may approach SDM, Uri, with their grievance along with supporting documents if any, within a period of one week from today. (VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE SRINAGAR 30.04.2025 Shabroz