1 S. No. 84 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) No. 1353/2020 Iram Watali …Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Sajad Ahmad Mir, Advocate. Vs. UT of J&K and Ors. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Bikramdeep Singh, Dy.AG. CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE O R D E R 24.04.2025 ORAL 1. In the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner herein claims to be owner in possession of land measuring 6 kanals 9 marlas covered under Survey Nos.1161/56, 1033/55, 1027/1/55, Khewat Nos.53, 137, 03 and Khata Nos. 159, 337, 06 situated at Gulbarg Colony, Barzulla District Srinagar while stating further that the officials of the Srinagar Municipal Corporation invaded the said land of the petitioner and removed and took away the iron gate installed thereon the said land without any authority and legal justification and left the same in the premises of the office of Srinagar Municipal Corporation at Barzulla and in this regard photographs of the said gate were also clicked by the petitioner, whereafter the petitioner again installed and fixed a gate of tin sheets in the said land which too was removed and taken away by the officials of the Srinagar Municipal Corporation, compelling the petitioner to approach the respondent 8 herein being SHO Police Station Saddar for registration of an FIR in the matter against the officials of Srinagar Municipal Corporation who, however, did not register the same and that the officials of the Municipal Corporation even macadamized the approach road leading to the said land of the property land of the petitioner forcibly without any power and authority which was also 2 resisted by the petitioner herein and even did not accept that the officials requests of the petitioner to refrain from taking law into their own hands in the matter compelling the petitioner to approach this Court through the medium of instant petition. 2. 2. Objections to the petition have been filed by respondents 3 to 7 wherein it is being stated that with regard to the removal and falling away of iron gate alleged by the petitioner, the said iron gate though removed was later on handed over to the owner under proper receipt and that since the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed and the iron gate removed was erected back at the same place where it was existing, the answering respondents in no way have encroached or created any hindrance to the peaceful possession to the property of the petitioner while stating further that the handing over and re-erection of the gate stands duly acknowledged by executing a receipt by the petitioner. . Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. Law is settled that no person can be deprived of his property save by the authority of law and if done otherwise an aggrieved person would be entitled to a legal relief on the ground that such action of the executive is in contravention of law as in law right to property has been held to be a human right besides a Constitutional right and law imposes a duty upon the State and its functionaries for protecting the property of a private persons from interference by lawless elements and persons not authorized by law. 4. Having regard to the aforesaid position of law and reverting back to the case in hand, it is manifest from the record that officials of the Srinagar Municipal Corporation have admitted to have removed and taken away iron gate installed on the landed property of the petitioner and thereafter returned and re-erected/installed the same on spot manifestly suggesting that the officials of the Srinagar Municipal Corporation have without any power, authority, competence or jurisdiction undertaken the said exercise, in that, the respondents in the objections filed to petition have not made a murmur or else placed on record any order of authorization in this regard 3 and instead have acknowledged to have undertaken the exercise of removal and taken away of the gate of the petitioner herein and thereafter returned the same and installed on spot without any authority of law. 5. 5. In view of the aforesaid position obtaining in the matter, inasmuch as the ambit and scope of extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court enshrined under Article 226 of the Constitution whereunder the consistent view of the Constitutional Courts is that in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction, compensation exemplary costs can be awarded in an appropriate case to a victim of infringement of a fundamental and Constitutional right under public law remedy in order to do complete justice to a party who has complained of infringement of fundamental and Constitutional right, the official of the Srinagar Municipal Corporation who have committed the aforesaid blatant act of infraction of public duty in the matter against the petitioner qua her property are rendered liable to pay compensation exemplary damages to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, while moulding reliefs sought in the instant petition the same is disposed of by directing the payment of exemplary damages by the Srinagar Municipal Corporation to the petitioner amounting to Rs.2 lacs within four weeks time from the date of passing of this order to be recovered after its payment by respondent 3 herein i.e. the Commissioner, Srinagar Municipal Corporation from the erring officials Corporation. 7. Disposed of. (JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE SRINAGAR 24.04.2025 Ishaq Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No Whether the order is reportable ? Yes/No