HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case:- WP(C) No. 1741/2021 Sansar Chand Age 92 years S/o Sh. Des Raj R/o Village Chak Murar, Tehsil Bishnah District Jammu …..Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Rakesh Sharma, Advocate. Vs 1. UT of J&K Through Commissioner/Secretary Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department Civil Secretariat, Srinagar 2. Director, Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department Gramin Vikas Bhawan, Talab Tillo, Jammu. 3. Assistant Commissioner Development, Jammu. 4. Rajni Bala Block Development Officer, Bishnah 5. Tehsildar, Bishnah. .….Respondent(s) Through: Mr. S. S. Nanda, Sr. AAG. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE ORDER (02.07.2025) 01. The cause of action which led the petitioner – Sansar Chand, a 92-year-old person, to come forward with institution of the present writ petition was issuance and service of an impugned notice No. BDO/B/20-21/353-359 dated 07.08.2021 issued by the respondent No. 4 – Rajni Bala, the then Block Serial No. 07 2 WP(C) No. 1741/2021 Development Officer (BDO), Bishnah whereby the petitioner and his family is alleged to have commenced construction work/activity opposite Govt. High School on the work executed by the Rural Development Department (RDD). 02. In the impugned notice, no specific facts were notified for the purpose of soliciting show cause reply from the petitioner as to the legal status of the site whereat the petitioner and his family was being alleged to have engaged in construction activity. 03. During the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner has come to expire as stated by Mr. Rakesh Sharma, learned Advocate for the petitioner. 04. Given the fact that the person i.e. the petitioner to whom the impugned notice was addressed has expired, as such, the impugned notice loses its legal efficacy. Therefore, the impugned notice is set-aside by reserving liberty and discretion in favour of the Block Development Officer (BDO), Bishnah that in case if any illegal/unauthorized construction by any act of encroachment has been done by the petitioner’s family members or for that matter even by the petitioner (now deceased) then a fresh legal course of action may be resorted to provided full state of facts are put forth to the legal heirs of the deceased petitioner to show cause and explain as to how the construction which was 3 WP(C) No. 1741/2021 objected to in the impugned notice and the site whereat the same was being undertaken is illegal and is meant to be prevented through the medium of course of action as intended by the respondent No. 4 – Rajni Bala then Block Development Officer (BDO), Bishnah. 05. The present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (RAHUL BHARTI) JUDGE JAMMU 02.07.2025 Bunty Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No Bunty Kumar 2025.07.04 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Jammu