1 LPA No. 258/2024 Serial No.01 REGULAR LIST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR LPA 258/2024 in[OWP 901/2018] ABDUL GAFFAR DAR …Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through: Mr. M. Sultan, Advocate Vs. UT OF JK AND OTHERS ...Respondent(s) Through: None CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE ORDE R 14.05.2025 Per Sanjeev Kumar-J (oral): 1. This intra-court appeal by the appellant is directed against an order and judgment dated 28th August, 2024, passed by the learned Single Judge [“the Writ Court”] in OWP No. 901/2018, titled “Mohammad Shafi Khan & Anr. Vs. State of JK and others”, whereby the Writ Court has disposed of writ petition filed by the respondents 7 & 8 [“private respondents”] with a direction to the official respondents to proceed in the matter on the basis of enquiry, if any, conducted strictly in accordance with the provisions of law. 2. The impugned judgment is assailed by the appellant on the ground that the Writ Court has directed the official respondents to proceed against the appellant without recording any specific finding as to whether the appellant has encroached upon any State/grazing land. 3. Mr. M. Sultan, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the private respondents have already obtained a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction against the respondents, restraining them from Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 16.05.2025 2 LPA No. 258/2024 causing any interference in the peaceful possession of the appellant over the land measuring 19 kanals 4 marlas comprising in khewat No. 438, khata No. 158 and survey No. 908/1 (12 kanals and 19 marlas) and survey No. 1302 (06 kanals and 5 marlas) situated at Nowbugh, Tehsil Chadoora, [“subject land”]. It is, thus, submitted that the Writ Court has erroneously allowed the writ petition filed by the private respondents, particularly when the dispute involved in the writ petition is essentially a private dispute inter-se the appellant and the private respondents. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, it is seen that the dispute raised in the writ petition pertains to the subject land which, according to the private respondents, is grazing land under the illegal occupation of the appellant. The private respondents, in their writ petition, had prayed, inter alia, for a direction to the official respondents to remove the alleged encroachment on the grazing land under occupation of the appellant. The appellant has vehemently disputed the assertions made by the private respondents and submits that he is in possession of the subject land as its lawful owner and, therefore, cannot be subjected to multiple enquiries in this regard. 5. We have given thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the appellant and have gone through the entire material on record. The dispute raised in the writ petition, as also the vehement stand taken by the appellant in this appeal, requires adjudication by the Competent Revenue Authority. Whether the subject land, claimed to be under occupation of the appellant, is State/grazing land or proprietary land of the appellant is a complicated disputed question of fact, which can Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 16.05.2025 3 LPA No. 258/2024 only be determined by reference to revenue record and other oral and documentary evidence. 6. Having regard to the nature of controversy involved, and in light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, we propose to dispose of this appeal by providing as under: i. That the Assistant Commissioner, Revenue, Budgam, assisted by the Tehsildar, Chadoora, and the concerned Patwari, shall conduct verification of the subject land, as well as other State/grazing land under occupation of the villagers. ii. That in the enquiry to be conducted by the aforesaid team, headed by the Assistant Commissioner, Revenue, Budgam, the appellant, private respondents, and other affected villagers shall be provided an adequate opportunity of being heard. iii. That the enquiry shall be concluded within a period of two months from the date copy of this order is served upon the Assistant Commissioner, Revenue, Budgam. iv. That on the basis of outcome of the enquiry, appropriate action shall be taken by the Revenue Authorities to evict the unauthorized occupants of State/ grazing land. The respondents shall, however, ensure that the appellant or for that matter any other person in occupation of their proprietary land is not disturbed or harassed. 7. Disposed of. (SANJAY PARIHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE SRINAGAR: 14.05.2025 “ARIF” Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 16.05.2025