Serial No.11 Regular Cause List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 863/2025 CM(2248/2025) IMTIYAZ AHMAD MIR … Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Arfat Rashid Lone, Advocate Vs. J AND K SPECIAL TRIBUNAL AND ORS. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Bikramdeep Singh, Dy AG CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE ORDER 21.04.2025 1. In the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner herein has challenged order dated 11.04.2025 passed by J&K Special Tribunal in an appeal titled as “Imtiyaz Ahmad Mir Vs. Commissioner SMC, Srinagar”. 2. According to the counsel for the petitioner a statutory appeal came to be filed by him the petitioner under and in terms of the provisions of the Municipal Corporation Act, 2000 against the order of demolition dated 07.04.2025 accompanied with an application for interim relief and though the said appeal came to be entertained by the Tribunal yet the interim relief sought came to be declined by a non-speaking order even without recording reasons thereof. 3. Perusal of the impugned order manifestly suggests that the Tribunal has passed the short impugned order without recording reasons inasmuch as a speaking one being sine quo non for a judicial or quasi judicial authority while passing an order which would have the effect of affecting the rights and interest of a party. 4. Having regard to the short nature of controversy involved in the petition, it is deemed appropriate not to retain the petition on the board of this Court but to dispose of the same at this stage with a direction to the Tribunal to re- visit and re-consider the matter of application of interim relief of the petitioner accompanying with the appeal claimed to have been preferred by the petitioner against demolition order dated 07.04.2025 and pass fresh orders thereof after providing an adequate opportunity of hearing to the appearing counsel for the parties. 5. Let the orders as directed above be passed preferably within week’s time from the date copy of this order be produced by the counsel for the petitioner before the Tribunal. 6. The impugned order in view of above shall be deemed to have been set aside for the aforesaid reasons and parties shall maintain status quo on spot till the passing of fresh orders by the Tribunal. 7. Disposed of. (JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE SRINAGAR: 21.04.2025 “S.Nuzhat”