Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6783 (JK)

MOHAMMAD ASHRAF BANDH AND ORS. v. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND ORS. (REVENUE)

WP(C)/731/2025 · 2025-03-27

Javed Iqbal Wani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP (C ) No. 731/2025 Serial No. 53 Supplementary list IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR. WP ( C ) No. 731/2025 CM No. 1802/2025 Mohammad Ashraf Bandh & Ors. ….. Petitioner(s) Through: - Mr. Shah Ashiq Hussain, Advocate. V/s Union Territory of J&K & Ors. ….. Respondent(s) Through: - Mr. Bikramdeep Singh, Dy. AG with Ms. Nowbahar Khan, A.C. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE ORDER 27.03.2025. 1. In the instant petition, petitioners have prayed that the respondents be commanded to utilize an alternate land for development of the Sports Field instead of the land measuring 30 Kanals and 17 marlas, falling under Survey No. 996 situated at Village Kaichachkoot, Tehsil Awantiproa, District, Pulwama. identified and earmarked by the respondents. 2. Perusal of the record of the petition would reveal that the Government has earmarked the land in question for construction of Sports Field for the development of sports, which seemingly is being objected by the petitioners on account of a notice issued by the Secretary Panchayat, addressed to the villagers including the petitioners herein calling upon them to cut their popular trees Abdul Rashid Ganaie I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document WP (C ) No. 731/2025 standing thereon in the said land purportedly in their unauthorized occupation. Thus, it gets revealed that the petitioners in essence while invoking the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court for protection of their unauthorized occupation and utilization of the land in question. 3. 3. The filing of the petition seemingly is aimed at to frustrate and subvert the establishment of the Sports Field proposed by the Government for the promotion of the sports in the area. 4. 4. The petition ex-facie in view of above is grossly misconceived and an abuse of process of law, warranting not only dismissal in simpliciter but also with costs. 5. 5. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed with costs amounting to Rs. 5000/- to be payable by the petitioners and deposited before the Registrar Judicial of this Court within two weeks from the date of passing of this order. 6. (Javed Iqbal Wani) Judge SRINAGAR 27.03.2025 “Abdul Rashid” Whether approved for reporting? Yes/No Abdul Rashid Ganaie I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document