JUDGMENT : Ali Mohd. Magrey, J. 1. By the medium of instant petition, petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus in the name of respondents 1 to 5 to the effect that immediate and effective steps are taken to stop encroachment on "Kahcharai Land" falling under Survey No. 628 situated at Turkawangam and respondents 6 to 8 be restrained from raising construction on the said "Kahcharai Land" Petitioner has also prayed for a writ of prohibition to the effect that respondents 6 to 8 be restrained from encroaching upon the "Kahcharai Land" under survey No. 628 and from raising any construction on the said land. The precise case of the petitioner is that the place petitioner lives at, has, adjacent to it, a big chunk of "Kahcharai Land" which has been encroached upon by respondents 6 to 8. Petitioner claims to have brought the matter into the notice of respondents 1 to 5 who did not take any action, constraining him to file the instant petition. 2. Pursuant to notice respondents appeared and filed reply wherein they admitted the factum of "kahcharai land" having been encroached upon. Besides it is further stated therein that not only the respondents 6 to 8 but the petitioner also has encroached upon the "Kahcharai Land" and that steps are being taken to remove the encroachment. Further it is stated in the reply that respondents 6 to 8 have offered their proprietary land in exchange of the land under occupation which is pending consideration. 3. Heard learned counsel for parties and considered the submissions. 4. This Court, in terms of order dated 18th July, 2013, taking note of the stand of the official respondents, directed respondent No. 3, Deputy Commissioner, Shopian, to file a detailed report indicating therein:-- "(i) As to when the respondents No. 6 to 8 have constructed the residential house on the Kahcharai Land, falling under Survey No. 628 situated at Turkwangam. (ii) When respondents No. 6 to 8 encroached upon Kahcharai Land and started raising construction, why action against them was not taken immediately, as permissible under Section 133 of Land Revenue Act and Section 26 of Agrarian Reforms Act. (iii) What is the status of the case of respondents No. 6 to 8 for exchange of land which as per reply is stated to be pending. (iii) What is the status of the case of respondents No. 6 to 8 for exchange of land which as per reply is stated to be pending. (iv) What is status of the encroachment of the petitioner and the status of his case for exchange, if any pending." 5. Respondent No. 3, Deputy Commissioner, Shopian, in compliance to the directions supra, filed his report wherein he stated that case of respondents 6 to 8 for exchange of land is pending consideration. The petitioner, it is stated, is in illegal possession of 16 kanals of, Shamilat land (Gair Mumkin Kohl) himself, where as respondents 6 to 8 are in illegal possession of 'Kahcharai land' having constructed a residential house thereupon. 6. While addressing arguments learned counsels agreed in principle that there should be no room of permitting anybody to illegally possess the 'Kahcharai land' or a State Land in disregard of all established procedures and regulations. 7. It is an admitted case that both respondents 6 to 8 as well as petitioner are illegally occupying the 'Kahcharai land' and the State land (Gair Mum-kin Kohl) respectively, therefore, allowing them to retain the said land would amount to authorizing the wrong. This Court has, time and again, maintained that it cannot act as a mute spectator to whatever wrong is brought to its notice, in fact, all endeavours shall be made to ensure that majesty of law is not only protected but uplifted also. Having said so, respondents 1 to 5 who are holding a public office and are governed by certain set of principles are also expected to adhere to the established norms and do not indulge in or facilitate the activities leading to instances of the nature this writ petition brings to light. They are expected to be the facilitators of good common cause and not the vice versa. 8. It is a bounden duty of the State respondents to remove encroachments from the State land especially 'Kahcharai Land' wherever it exists and in doing so they do not need any specific direction, as already in number of other matters such directions have been passed and even otherwise there exists a fool proof mechanism in the shape of relevant Rules and Acts those need to be followed in this behalf. The State respondents, at the same time, shall expeditiously decide the applications filed in terms of Section 133 of the Land Revenue Act, Svt. 1996, so that no hindrance is faced to proceed against the violators, in accordance with law. 9. Having regard to what has been stated hereinbefore, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 to 5 to ensure retrieving of 'Kahcharai Land' and other State land from its encroachers in general and from respondents 6 to 8 in particular with reference to implementation of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case titled Jagpal Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors., reported as AIR 2011 SC 1123 . Out of the land in question an area of 10 marlas, in terms of Section 133 Sub-Section 2 Clause (a) Proviso 1 of Land Revenue Act, shall be subject to the decision that shall be taken by the respondents on an application stated to be pending with the respondents 1 to 5. In case the decision for exchange of land is not found feasible, the said portion of 10 marlas shall also be retrieved without fail. Disposed of along with all CMPs.