KAMLESH KUMAR v. UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR TH DISTRICT MAGISTRATE UDHAMPUR AND ORS
WP(C)/1654/2026 · 2026-06-03
Moksha Khajuria Kazmi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1380 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1380 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
WP (C) No. 1654/2026
Kamlesh Kumar .....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. Akarshan Magotra, Advocate
v/s UT of J&K and Others .....Respondent(s)
Through :- Ms. Mehar Bali, Advocate vice Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE
ORDER 03.06.2026
1. By this petition, the petitioner herein is seeking a direction upon respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to consider his case for change in alignment of the road from Mantalai to Sira to Lothad be taken from an alternative route other than the land measuring 08 marlas falling under khasra no. 513 situated at village Sarar, Tehsil Chenani, District Udhampur.
2. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner entered into an agreement to sell with one Mr. Shankaru, S/o Ram Dayal, R/ Village Sarar, Karpalt, Tehsil Chenani, District Udhampur, on 25.08.2011 by virtue of which, the petitioner is in peaceful possession of the measuring 08 marlas falling under khasra no. 513 situated at village Sarar, Karpalt, Tehsil Chenani, District Udhampur.
3. It is further stated that on 22.07.2025, some Government officials came on the spot and started conducting survey over the land of the petitioner. On asking of the petitioner, the officials told him that the Sr. No. 153
2
survey for the road from Mantalai to Sira km 4th to Lothad is being conducted and the said land forms part of the road alignment.
4. On 23.07.2025, petitioner made a representation before the learned District Magistrate, Udhampur thereby raising his grievance and the learned District Magistrate, Udhampur forwarded the same, for seeking report, to Assistant Executive Engineer, Pradhan Mantri Grameen Sadak Yojana.
5.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he would feel satisfied if the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to consider the claim of the petitioner for realignment within a reasonable period of time.
6. Ms. Mehar Bali, Advocate states that she is not averse to the proposition being made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
7. Be that as it may, the instant petition is disposed of at the threshold thereby directing respondent nos. 1 to 4 to consider the claim of the petitioner for realignment of the road from Mantalai to Sira within a period of four weeks from the date of passing of this order, by passing a speaking order thereon.
(Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) Judge
JAMMU 03.06.2026 Manik