Serial No. 13 Regular List IN HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C)No. 3595/2019 Mohammad Abdullah Dar …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Shafqat Nazir, Adv. Vs. Government of JK and Ors. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Ilyas Laway, GA. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE. ORDER 07.05.2025 1. The dispute in the instant petition is with regard to the compensation of land. The petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of the said property, whereas, the respondents 4 and 5 claim that the land in question is an evacuee property. 2. During the pendency of the instant petition, the respondents 4 and 5 have re-notified the said land as an evacuee property, regarding which, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they have availed the remedy under law thereby challenging the aforesaid notification. 3. In the aforesaid backdrop, the proceedings in the instant petition were deferred till the final decision with regard to the proceedings, challenging the notification was made vide Order dated 14th February, 2023, passed by the Division Bench of this Court. Besides, the Division Bench has observed that it is expected that the respondent no. 4 [Custodian General] shall expeditiously decide the proceedings initiated by the petitioner, thereby challenging the notification. 4. At this stage, Mr. Shafqat Nazir, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in pursuance to the Order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, the respondent no. 4 has decided the application preferred by the petitioner before the respondent no. 4 in terms of Order dated 14th February, 2023, passed by the Division Bench, which decision has gone against the petitioner and feeling aggrieved of the same, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the respondent no. 4, which, as on date is pending adjudication. 5. Since the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending adjudication before the respondent no. 4, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep this petition alive. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of by directing the respondent no. 4 to expeditiously decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner, as the issue projected by the petitioner in the instant petition pertains to the release of compensation and the release of compensation will be contingent upon the outcome of the appeal which is pending adjudication before the respondent no. 4. 6. It is made clear that in case the appeal, which has been preferred by the petitioner, is decided against him, the petitioner will be at liberty to seek appropriate remedy in furtherance of the aforesaid decision with regard to the release of compensation under law. 7. Disposed of in the manner indicated above. (WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE SRINAGAR: 07.05.2025 “Shamim Dar”