S. No. 155 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 2263/2025 CM(5997/2025) GHULAM RASOOL WANI AND ANR …Petitioners Through: Mr. S.M.Ayoub, Advocate v. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS ...Respondent(s) Through: None CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE O R D E R 15.09.2025 1. In the instant petition, petitioners herein have challenged re-auction Notice No. TEH/OQ/KGM/25/181 dated 10thSeptember, 2025, issued qua the apple crop of the migrant land recorded in the name of private respondents herein falling under survey no. 654/634/515 situated at Village Sindoo,Shirmal, Shopian. 2. It is being stated by the petitioners herein that the petitioners herein have filed a suit for specific performance of the contract before the court of Principal District Judge, Shopian, against the predecessors in interest of the private respondent herein, qua the subject matter land which suit, however, subsequently came to be transferred to the court of Principal District Judge, Jammu, and finally came to be dismissed by the said court on 24th July 2018, aggrieved whereof, the petitioners herein filed an appeal before the Jammu Wing of this Court wherein an interim order came to be passed on 4th September 2018, in the application accompanying the said appeal directing maintenance of status-quo with regard to property in question. 3. It is also stated that during the pendency of the said appeal, respondent 3 herein issued the impugned re-auction notice despite the fact that the land in question is in possession of the petitioners herein and the crop belongs to the petitioners herein as the said land came to be developed by the petitioners herein into an orchard after having spent more than Rs.68,000/- in connection therewith. 4. It is also stated that the fallout of the issuance of the impugned auction notice has the effect of taking away of the legal right of the petitioners herein over the said land and the crop and that otherwise also the auction notice is bad in law and that the issuance of the same in essence amounts to violation of the orders of status-quo dated 4th September, 2018 passed by this court in the aforesaid appeal filed by the petitioners herein. Heard counsel for the petitioners and perused the record. 5. Perusal of the record available on the file would reveal that the impugned auction notice has been issued on the premise that the subject matter land is a migrant property and is presently under the custody of the Tehsildar Keegam, despite the claim of the petitioners that the subject matter land is in their possession and that the apple crop therein the said land belongs to them having been developed by them. 6. Admittedly the order of status-quo passed by Jammu Wing of this Court on 4th September 2018 in CFA No. 17 of 2018 concerning the subject matter land is in place arising out of a suit filed by the petitioners herein. 7. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid position obtaining in the matter, this Court is not inclined to display indulgence and to exercise discretion; firstly, owing to the disputed questions of the fact qua the ownership and possession of the subject matter land and secondly, on account of the pendency of the aforesaid appeal CFA No. 17 of 2018 before the Jammu Wing of this Court and the operation of the order of the status quo passed therein. 8. Resultantly petition fails and is dismissedalong with connected CM. (JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE SRINAGAR 15.09.2025 “opinder”