HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No. 2169/2019 Jawahar Lal Kaul S/o Late Sham Lal Kaul originally resident of Sheetal Nath Srinagar At present TRT No. 16 Block No. 29, Jagti Township Nagrota, Jammu …..Appellants Through: Mr. Sumir Pandita, Advocate Vs 1. State of Jammu and Kashmir Through Relief and Rehabilitation Commissioner (M) Near IIM, Canal Road, Jammu 2. Deputy Commissioner (R) Relief Organization Jammu 3. Camp Commandant (Migrants) Jagti (Zone-A) Jagti Jammu. 4. Vinod Kumar S/o Kanahya Lal R/o TRT No. 16 Block No. 29 Jagti Township Nagrota, Jammu .…. Respondents Through: Ms. Jagmeet Kour, Advocate CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER 18.08.2025 1. The petitioner, through the medium of present petition, has sought a direction upon the respondents to handover the possession of the quarter bearing TRT No. 16 Block No. 29, Jagti Township Nagrota, Jammu to the petitioner. 2. Initially, the writ petition was filed by the petitioner seeking a direction upon the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the aforesaid quarter but it appears that during the pendency of the writ petition, possession of the quarter was taken over by private respondent-Vinod Kumar, which prompted the petitioner to seek amendment of the writ petition thereby seeking relief of possession in respect of the aforesaid quarter. 3. As per case of the petitioner, he has migrated to Jammu from Kashmir Valley and has been registered as a migrant with Sr. No. 18 2 WP(C) No. 2169/2019 respondent No. 1. It has been submitted that the petitioner had made an application to respondent No. 1 to allot him two room tenement at Jagti, Nagrota, Jammu, where accommodation for the Kashmiri Migrants has been set up by the Government. After thorough verification of his application about status of the petitioner, quarter No. 16, Block 29 at Jagti Township, Jammu was allotted in his favour and possession of the said quarter was handed over to the petitioner on 19.02.2014 in terms of possession letter of even date. 4. It has been submitted that while the petitioner was living in the allotted quarter, his wife suffered from various ailments, as a result of which, she was admitted to the various hospitals in and outside the State. She was also referred to AIIMS, New Delhi for further treatment. It has been submitted that after prolonged treatment of wife of the petitioner, she passed away at Jammu on 27.12.2017. It has been submitted that on account of ailment of wife of the petitioner, the quarter allotted to him remained locked for some time and during this period, respondent No. 2 without issuing any notice to the petitioner sealed the quarter after passing order dated 11.01.2018. The petitioner is stated to have filed a representation before respondent No. 2 which was duly considered, whereafter, respondent No. 1 issued order dated 05.04.2018 by virtue of which, the aforesaid quarter was restored in favour of the petitioner. 5. While the petitioner was pursuing his representation for exchange of his quarter with any other quarter at Buta Nagar, Jammu, in the year, 2019, respondent No. 2 asked the petitioner to 3 WP(C) No. 2169/2019 vacate the quarter. The petitioner approached this Court by way of present writ petition and an interim order came to be issued by this Court on 04.06.2019 whereby a direction was issued to the respondents that he should not be dispossessed from the quarter in question. In violation of the aforesaid order, respondent No. 2 is stated to have put private respondent-Vinod Kumar in possession of the quarter in question without cancellation of allotment of quarter and without there being any allotment in favour of the said respondent. 6. Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 have filed their reply to the writ petition in which they have submitted that the quarter in question had remained locked for a considerable period of time which prompted the official respondents to seal the said quarter. Once the petitioner made a representation to the official respondents, the quarter was restored to him considering genuine reasons put forward by him. Regarding the assertion of the petitioner that quarter in question has been handed over to the private respondent, the official respondents have simply denied the said assertion for want of knowledge. 7. Private respondent-Vinod Kumar has not contested the writ petition though he did file an application for his impleadment as the respondent to the unamended writ petition. In his said application, it has been submitted that during Covid-19 pandemic, he lost his job, as a result of which, he was unable to pay monthly rent which forced him to vacate the rented premises. It has been submitted that some social organizations and inhabitants of the colony came to his rescue and they allowed him to reside in the 4 WP(C) No. 2169/2019 vacant quarter No. 16, Block No. 29, Jagti Township, Jammu on humanitarian grounds where he is still putting up along with his family. It has been submitted by private respondent that he is a registered migrant and the petitioner has unnecessarily locked the quarter in question and that he does not reside over there. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. So far as allotment of the quarter in question in favour of the petitioner is concerned, the same is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that after the quarter was sealed, on the basis of representation made by the petitioner, possession of the quarter was restored in his favour. 10. Respondent No. 3 along with his application has placed on record communication dated 10.06.2021 of Tehsildar, Camp Commandant (Migrants), Relief Jagti Zone-A in which it has been stated that quarter in question has been given to respondent-Vinod Kumar who is a Kashmiri Migrant as he is in dire need of accommodation because his father, who has been allotted quarter No. 4 in Block No. 46 in Jagti Township has a large family. It is further stated in the said communication that inmates of adjoining Blocks decided to accommodate family of respondent-Vinod Kumar in the quarter in question which was lying vacant and locked for a long time. 11. Thus, from the record and as per own case of respondent-Vinod Kumar, the quarter in question has never been allotted in his favour by the competent authority. He has simply taken over the possession of the quarter in question which is 5 WP(C) No. 2169/2019 property of the Government without there being any allotment in his favour. His possession over the quarter in question is, therefore, admittedly unauthorized. Even the stand of the official respondents is that the allotment of the quarter in question in favour of the petitioner has not been cancelled and they have denied having knowledge about the allotment of the quarter in favour of respondent No. 3. 12. In the face of aforesaid admitted facts, the action relating to dispossession of the petitioner from the allotted quarter is contrary to the law and the action of private respondent of taking over the possession of the quarter in question has also no sanction of law. Therefore, the official respondents are legally bound to ensure that the quarter in question is vacated by respondent No. 3 and its possession is handed over to the petitioner. 13. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is allowed and a direction is issued to the official respondents to evict respondent- Vinod Kumar from the quarter bearing No. 16, Block No. 29, Jagti Township, Nagrota Jammu and thereafter, to hand over the possession of the same to the petitioner. 14. The entire exercise shall be carried out by the official respondents within a period of one month from today. 15. Disposed of. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE JAMMU 18.08.2025 Tarun/PS Whether the order is speaking? Yes Whether the order is reportable? No Tarun Kumar Gupta 2025.08.26 13:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document