Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2026 DAILYLAW 112 (JK)

ROMESH KUMAR SHARMA AND OTHERS v. UNION OF INDIA TH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI AND OTHERS

WP(C)/65/2026 · 2026-01-19

Rajesh Sekhri

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No. 65/2026 Date of pronouncement: 19.01.2026 Date of uploading: 19.01.2026 01.Romesh Kumar Sharma, Age 77 years S/o Late Sh. Isher Dutt Sharma R/o Udhampur at present 96-B, Sector 7, Channi Himmat, Jammu. 02.Sneh Lata, age 71 years w/o Late Sh. Isher Dutt R/o Udhampur at present Dansal, Jammu. 03. Rajender Kumar Sharma, age 70 years. s/o Late Sh. Shiv Dutt Sharma R/o Udhampur at present H. No. 4, Kucha nar Singh, Panjthirthi, Jammu. 04. Reeta Sharma, Age 72 years. W/o Late Sh. Shiv kumar R/o 75, Sector-1, EWS Colony, Lower Roop Nagar, Jammu. 05.Anil Sharma, Age 55 years S/o Late Sh. Shiv Kumar Sharma R/o 75, Sector-1, EWS Colony, Lower Roop Nagar, Jammu. 06. Seema Sharma Puri Aged 49 years W/o Late Sh. Shiv Kumar Sharma R/o 75 Sector-1, EWS colony, Lower Roop Nagar, Jammu. 07. Renu Kumari, Age 60 years W/o Late Sh. Kuldeep Kumar R/o 143 Patel Bazar, Jammu. 08.Akankshi Sharma, aged 37 years. D/o Late Sh. Kuldeep Kumar Sharma R/o 143, Patel Bazar, Jammu. 09. Anil Kumar, Aged 32 years s/o Late Sh. Kuldeep Kumar Sharma R/o 143, Patel Bazar, Jammu. …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Sr. No. 13 2 WP(C) No. 65/2026 10. Neelam Sharma, Age 65 years. w/o Late Sh. Lalit Kumar Sharma R/o MCJ-1170, Lane No. 22, Rajpura Mangotrian, Jammu. 11. Amit Sharma, age 46 years s/o Late Sh. Lalit Kumar Sharma R/o MCJ-1170, Lane No. 22, Rajpura Mangotrian, Jammu. 12. Rahul Sharma, age 39 years s/o Late sh. Lalit Kumar Sharma R/o MCJ-1170, lane No. 22 Rajpura Mangotrian, Jammu. 13. Roshi Padha, age 47 years D/o Late Sh. Lalit kumar Sharma W/o sh. Vijay kumar R/o W.No. 6, H. No. 23 Near Hotel MAA katra 14. Richa Goswami, Age 42 years W/o Sh. Gourav Goswami R/o 100, Prem Nagar, New Plot, Jammu. Through: Mr. Parvinder Singh, Advocate. q vs 01.Union of India Through its Secretary Ministry of Defence, Pragwati Bhawan, South Block, New Delhi. 02. Director General Defence Estates, Raksha Sampada Bhawan, Ullan Bater Road, Delhi Cantt.-110010. 03.Principal, Director Defence Estates, Northern command, Satwari, Jammu. 04. Defence Estate Officer Udhampur Circle, Northern Command, Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India HQ Northern Command, C/o 56 APO. .…. Respondent(s) 3 WP(C) No. 65/2026 05.UT of J&K Through Commissioner/Secretary Revenue Department, Civil Secretariat, Jammu. 06. Deputy Commissioner (Collector), Udhampur. Through: None. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE ORDER 19.01.2026 01. Petitioners claim to be owners of their respective shares in the landed property as per revenue records and Acquaintance Rolls annexed with present petition. The case set out by the petitioners is that the respondents initiated the requisition and acquisition proceedings with respect to the aforesaid property under the provisions of Requisition and Acquisition of Immoveable Property Act, 1952 [“the Act”]. Form-I and Form-J came to be issued in favour of the petitioners, whereby the requisition and proposed acquisition of the subject land came to be acknowledged by the respondents. 02. It is further case of the petitioners that assessment of cost/compensation determining the amount payable to the petitioners, as per law, was also carried out. On the completion of statutory formalities, the file came to be forwarded to Union of India for final approval/sanction. 03. The grievance of the petitioners is that despite lapse of considerable period of time, Union of India has failed to take final call in the matter or communicate the approval, due to which, they are being deprived of their property without payment of compensation, which action on the part of respondents is illegal and arbitrary. 4 WP(C) No. 65/2026 04. Having regard to the limited nature of controversy, present petition is admitted to hearing at its threshold and disposed of with a direction to the respondents to finalise the requisition and acquisition proceedings, strictly as per the mandate of the Act, within a period of 08 weeks from the date a copy of this order along with copy of petition and annexures are made available. 05. Disposed of. (Rajesh Sekhri) Judge Jammu 19.01.2026 Sushant Whether the judgment is reportable? Yes/No Whether the judgment is speaking? Yes/No