54 Supp HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR LPA No. 61/2025 CM No. 1676/2025 Caveat No. 577/2025 Ghulam Mohammad Ganie and Ors. ….. Petitioner (s) Through: Mr. Aijaz Chisthi, Adv. V/s UT of J&K and Ors. ….. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Adil Asmi, Adv. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani, Judge ORDER 22.04.2025 1. Impugned in this appeal filed by the appellants under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent is a composite interim order dated 24.02.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 2402/2022 clubbed with WP(C) No. 843/2023 whereby the learned Single Judge [“the Writ Court] has modified the interim order of status quo and permitted the respondent Bank to resume the construction activity at site. The interim order of the status quo was modified keeping in view the fact that the Bank had already started construction activity and had raised construction at site to the extent of 60%. P a g e | 2 LPA No. 61/2025 CM No. 1676/2025 Caveat No. 577/2025 2. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the writ Court, while modifying the interim order of status quo, has in paragraph ‘9’ of the judgment impugned, taken care of the interest of the appellants qua the land in question. The writ petition is yet to be taken up for consideration and the issue as to whether the appellants are entitled to pro-rata share of the land in question, which as per the appellants is recorded as Shamilat Deh (Section 5), is a question which is to be determined by the Writ Court after hearing both the sides. The Writ Court has already directed the parties to complete the pleadings by next date so that the matter is taken up for final consideration 3. In view of the aforesaid, we are not inclined to interfere with the interim order passed by the Writ Court and, accordingly, dispose of this appeal by providing that the respondents, who may not have filed their responses/objections, shall file their response/objections by or before next date fixed in the matter 4. Having regard to the nature of the controversy involved, we would like to request the learned Single Judge to take up the matter for final consideration on next date fixed in the matter. Needless to reiterate that in case the appellants succeed in the Court finally to establish their right to compensation qua the subject land, the appellants would be entitled to be adequately compensated. P a g e | 3 LPA No. 61/2025 CM No. 1676/2025 Caveat No. 577/2025 Stopping the construction midway is not in the public interest and this has been rightly appreciated by the writ Court. 5. Disposed of. (Mohd Yousuf Wani) (Sanjeev Kumar) Judge Judge SRINAGAR 22.04.2025 Aasif Whether the order is speaking Yes/No Whether the order is reportable Yes/No