HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CM No. 8377/2025 in OWP No. 1316/2012 Mohd. Ashraf …..Petitioner Through: Mr. Bari Abdullah, Advocate Vs Union of India & Ors. .….Respondents Through: None CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER (03.02.2026) CM No. 8377/2025 01. By way of the present application, the petitioner seeks modification of the order dated 28.08.2025 passed by this Court. Vide the said order, while allowing the writ petition, respondent Nos. 6 and 7 were directed to get the land belonging to the petitioner, which is under the occupation of respondent Nos. 3 to 5, demarcated and to release rental compensation in favour of the petitioner from the date the same became due, at the rates fixed by the Government from time to time. Regular List Serial No. 18 2 CM No. 8377/2025 in OWP No. 1316/2012 02. It has been averred in the application that when the land was occupied by respondent Nos. 6 and 7 in the year 1994, the same was full of fruit-bearing trees, that were allegedly cut down by the said respondents. However, while allowing the writ petition, this Court did not pass any direction regarding assessment of compensation for the fruit-bearing trees or for release of such compensation in favour of the petitioner. 03. Upon consideration of the pleadings, it is evident that although the petitioner had pleaded that fruit-bearing trees existed on the land at the time its occupation in the year 1994, yet the petitioner had approached this Court only in the year 2012. After a lapse of more than three decades, at this stage, there would hardly be any reliable evidence available with regard to the existence of such fruit-bearing trees on the land in question which is not a fact admitted by the respondents in their pleadings. Therefore, even if a direction is issued to the respondents to assess compensation for the fruit-bearing trees and to release the same in favour of the petitioner, such a direction would not be executable after the passage of more than thirty years. 04. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, modification of the order dated 28.08.2025 in the manner as sought by 3 CM No. 8377/2025 in OWP No. 1316/2012 the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. 05. Dismissed. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE JAMMU 03.02.2026 SUNIL Whether the order is speaking ? : Yes Whether the order is reportable ? : No