Muzaffar Hussain Attar, J. 1. Appellant claims that he along with two other persons owned and possessed three residential houses viz house No. 41/1,42/2 and 41/3 with land under-neath and appurtenant thereto measuring 3610.07-1/2 Sft covered under Khasra No. 156 min at Chalpan Kocha Mouza Zainakadal Srinagar. The appellant's claim is that he has 1/3rd share out of the aforesaid property. It is further claim of the appellant that on the onset of abnormal circumstances in the State of J&K, more particularly in the Valley of Kashmir, he left his home and hearth. It is further claimed that the property suffered damage for which he was paid compensation. It is further claim of the appellant that the property has been taken over by the State Authorities and acquisition proceedings were initiated in respect of same under the J&K State Land Acquisition Act, Svt 1990 (1934 AD), (for short Act of 1990) but without any notice to the appellant. The appellant has prayed for quashment of the proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, and demolition of the construction raised as also direction to respondents to handover property to the appellant. 2. On notice issued, respondents have filed objections, in which it is stated that Superintending Engineer circular road project Srinagar vide communicated dated 18th Dec. 2004 made request to District Collector Srinagar to take steps for acquiring the gutted houses of Chirvi's at Chalpan Kocha Zainakadal Srinagar for construc­tion of Community Hall for use of general public to be funded out of M.P.LAD's which were already earmarked by the member parliament. The relevant part of the objections is reproduced as under :- "To meet the request, District Collector through Additional Deputy Com­missioner initiated process of ascertaining record of rights over the land admeasuring 1 kanal, 10 marlas, 6 sft and 9" under Khasra No. 156 min. The land being Abadi Deh, record of owners was not available, however, local enquiries revealed three Shareholders namely Noor-ud-Din Shah (9 mar-las-12'), Tolla Ram (8 marlas-249'9") and Chirvi's House (11 1/2 marlas). The later two were migrants. The case of acquisition of the said property was placed before H.L.C. in its 11th meeting on 22-07-2005. H.L.C. decided to acquire the property for a compensation of 19.777 lacs. An amount of Rs. 20 lacs were placed before the District Collector by the indenting department for its disbursement to the owners of the said prop­erty. The case of acquisition of the said property was placed before H.L.C. in its 11th meeting on 22-07-2005. H.L.C. decided to acquire the property for a compensation of 19.777 lacs. An amount of Rs. 20 lacs were placed before the District Collector by the indenting department for its disbursement to the owners of the said prop­erty. An amount of Rs. 20 lacs were placed before the District Collector by the indenting department for its disbursement to the owners of the said prop­erty. Vice Letter No. 1762-66/LAC/1592 dated 20-09-2005 the acquisition case was entrusted to Collector Circular Road Project along with revenue de­posit bill of Rs. 20 lacs. Accordingly a Notification under Section 4 (1) J&K State Land Acquisition Act, SVt 1990 for an area of 1 kanal-10 Marlas-6 Sqt and 9" under Khasra No. 156 min was issued vide No. C/CRP/1111-24 dated 28-09-2005 by the Collector, Circular Road, Srinagar. The notification was also endorsed to Relief Commissioner (migrant Prop­erties) Jammu with the request to serve the notification to the concerned migrant owners. Vide his letter No. SE-CRP/6966-69 28-09-2006 superintending Engineer, CR. Project addressed to Div. commissioner Kashmir and endorsed to Collector, C.R.P. informed that the land in fact belonged to three direct persons in the following ratio and involved three gutted structures:- S.No. Title Name of Owner Str Area involved No. 1. Abad-deh Tolla Ram & Others (Migrant) S-l 3132.74 Sft 2. do Chirvi's family (Migrant) S-2 3602.60 Sft 3. do Noor-ud-Din Shah & Ors. S-3 994.00 Sft 7729.59 Sft K- M- Sft 8 115 Consequent upon the change in quantum of land, fresh indent was sent to the collector resulting in corrigendum to earlier notification which detailed the land to be acquired afresh. Since no body appeared to object to the acquisition of the said property the matter was placed before the H.L.C. in its 122nd meeting held on 5-10-2006. The property i.e. S-l, S-2 and S3 was decided to be acquired on compensa­tion as under:- S.No. Str.No. Name of owner Land involved Amount 1. S-l Tolla Ram and Ors 3132.79 Sft 8.419 lacs 2. S-2 Chirvi's Family 3602.60 Sft 9.045 lacs 3. S-2 Noor-ud-Din Shah 994.00 Sft 2.187 lacs The migrants were informed of the proceedings of acquisition including the notification under Section 4(1) through Relief Commissioner (migrant properties) and in addition the collector himself informed them telephon-ically, however, they did not respond. The compensation amount of Rs. S-2 Chirvi's Family 3602.60 Sft 9.045 lacs 3. S-2 Noor-ud-Din Shah 994.00 Sft 2.187 lacs The migrants were informed of the proceedings of acquisition including the notification under Section 4(1) through Relief Commissioner (migrant properties) and in addition the collector himself informed them telephon-ically, however, they did not respond. The compensation amount of Rs. 20 Lacs has been deposited with the Deputy commissioner, Srinagar being custodian of migrant properties under J&K Migrant Immoveable property Preservation, Protection and Restraint on Distress Sales) Act, 1997." 3. The community hall has been construed on spot. The Id single judge vide its order and judgment dated 26th Nov. 2009 dismissed the writ petition. It is this order and judgment which is called in question in this Letters Patent Appeal. 4. We have heard Id counsel for parties. Considered the matter. 5. Mr. I. Sofi, Id counsel for appellant submitted that the property of the appellant was protected property in terms of J&K Migrants Immovable Property (Preservation, Protection and Restrain on Distress Sales) Act 1997, (for short Act of 1997). Ld counsel further submitted that this property could not become subject matter of acquisition. Ld counsel also submitted that when acquisition proceedings were initiated under the Act of 1990, the Collector did not follow the mandate of Section 4(1) of the Act of 1990 and no notice was served on the appellant, thus, he was deprived from filing his objections. Ld counsel submitted that that the LPA deserves to be allowed and the judgment impugned requires to be set-aside. 6. Mr. Allau din Dy AG, appearing for the respondents submitted that the property was requisitioned for public purpose viz construction of community hall which community hall already stands constructed on spot. Ld counsel further submitted that the appellant is not the owner of the property and has no right to file the writ petition. Ld counsel also submitted the Collector while initiating and concluding the acquisition proceedings has followed the procedure provided under the Act of 1990. Ld counsel accordingly prayed that this appeal deserves to be dismissed. 7. The Act of 1997 is a temporary legislation; the purpose of enacting same was to provide preservation, protection and restraint on distress sales of immovable property of the migrants. This legislation was conceived and ultimately given shape of law to protect the interest of migrants which they have in their immovable property. 8. 7. The Act of 1997 is a temporary legislation; the purpose of enacting same was to provide preservation, protection and restraint on distress sales of immovable property of the migrants. This legislation was conceived and ultimately given shape of law to protect the interest of migrants which they have in their immovable property. 8. The section of popula tion which has left the Valley of Kashmir being children of the soil will one day come back and settle at their residential places. The Act of 1997 will loose it's efficacy and cease to operate at that point of time. One of the fundamental purpose of enacting the Act of 1997 was to save property of the migrant from being encroached upon without any authority of law. The Act of 1997 would not prevent the lawful authority in exercise of its lawful powers to deal with the property of the migrant. The Act of 1990 does authorize the competent authority to initiate proceedings for acquisition of immovable property which will include migrant property also, if same is to be done in public interest. The Act of 1997 does not prevent the competent authority to initiate acquisition proceedings in respect of migrant property. 9. In this case the property was requisitioned for public purpose viz for construction of community hall. In the objections, it is stated that not only notice under section 4(1) of the Act of 1990 was sent to the appellant but also served through Relief Commissioner (Migrant Properties). 10. The Id single judge has recorded in the judgment that he has perused the record produced by the respondents before the court and found that due procedure under the Act of 1990 has been followed. Ld single judge accordingly did not find any fault with the procedure which has been followed while initiating and conclud­ing the acquisition proceedings. The challenge thrown to the acquisition proceed­ings is rendered inconsequential in view of finding of Id Single Judge. 11. In the objections, it is already stated the Collector has even telephonically informed the migrant. This plea has not been controverter by filing rejoinder affidavit or supplementary affidavit so it is to be taken correct. 12. The appellant's claim of being owner of the property has been denied by the respondents in the objections. The appellant has placed reliance on order No. DCS/Relief/Mig/16 of 1996 dated 22nd March 1996 issued by Dy. This plea has not been controverter by filing rejoinder affidavit or supplementary affidavit so it is to be taken correct. 12. The appellant's claim of being owner of the property has been denied by the respondents in the objections. The appellant has placed reliance on order No. DCS/Relief/Mig/16 of 1996 dated 22nd March 1996 issued by Dy. Commissioner Srinagar/M, wherein and where-under sanction was accorded to the grant of ex-gratia relief in respect of the properties which were gutted/damaged as a result of subversive activities. Appellants name does not figure in the said list even though reliance is placed on the same by him. In order to challenge action of statutory authority a person has to show that he is aggrieved of same and he has suffered personal injury. No writ of certiorari can be issued unless it is shown that a person has suffered personal injury at the hands of the statutory authority or executive authority. 13. For the above stated reasons, we find no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.