AEJAZ AHMAD SHEIKH v. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K (IRRIGATION AND FLOOD CONTROL) AND ORS
WP(C)/3104/2024 · 2025-01-01
Sanjay Dhar
Writ Petition (Civil)body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 9775 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 9775 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
67 Supplementary
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) No. 3104/2024 CM No. 8452/2024 Aejaz Ahmad Sheikh
….. Petitioner (s)
Through: Ms. Tabish Latief, Adv.
V/s
Union Territory of J&K &Ors.
….. Respondent(s)
Through:
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge.
ORDER 01.01.2025
1. The petitioner has sought a direction upon the respondents asking them to remove the encroachment of Kalidar/Gorkha Bahadur Canal and for widening the road for public purpose with a further direction that Kalidar/Gorkha Bahadur Canal be maintained in its original shape.
2. The petitioner claims to be a resident of Village Kralpora, Bonishah, Chadoora. It has been submitted that the petitioner is living on the embankment of the Kalidar Canal and Bonishah Kralpora is the interjection of two canals i.e, Gorkha Bahadur Canal and the Kalidar Canal. It has been further submitted that with the passage of time, the embankment/pathway of the Kalidar Canal/Gorkha Bahadur Canal was encroached by the local Asif Gull I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 02.01.2025 00:01
P a g e | 2 WP(C) No. 3104/2024 CM No. 8452/2024
people living on the embankment of the canal/ road. As a result of the encroachments from both sides of the Canal and pathway, the same has been reduced to half from its original position. It has been further contended that the petitioner has taken several measures for removal of these encroachments as the same are directly affecting his rights. According to the petitioner, the residents of the area had made a representation to the respondents on 18.02.2015 but nothing happened in the matter. Again the petitioner is stated to have filed application on 26.09.2023 before the Grievance Cell but no action has been taken.
3. Having regard to the limited nature of the grievance projected by the petitioner in this writ petition, the same can be disposed of at threshold itself by passing appropriate directions upon the respondents.
4. Accordingly, respondent No. 1 to 5 shall after treating the present writ petition as a representation on behalf of the petitioner take appropriate action in accordance with law. The needful shall be done within a period of two months from the date a copy of this writ petition along with a copy of this order are served upon the respondents.
5. Disposed of as above.
(Sanjay Dhar)
Judge SRINAGAR 01.01.2025 Aasif Asif Gull I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 02.01.2025 00:01