Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 507 (JK)

Inhabitants of Village Anji v. State of J&K

2018-07-12

SANJAY KUMAR GUPTA

body2018
JUDGMENT : 1. Through the instant writ petition, petitioners seek the following reliefs: “(a) Commanding the respondents not to carry on the process of muck dumping of yard no. 4 of tunnel T-2 on Katra Reasi Section of USBRL project beyond the 55 kanals of land falling ulnder Khasra no. 97 situated at village Anji Tehsil & District Reasi which has been acquired by the respondent No. 3, upon the land of the petitioners, grave yards and natural water spring as the same will cause great prejudice to the right of the petitioners. (b) Commanding the respondent No. 5 to provide police protection to the petitioners so that the respondent No. 4 will not carried on the muck dumping on the land of the petitioners. (c) Commanding the respondents to dump the waste material of yard no. 4 of Tunnel T-2 on Katra Reasi section of USBRL project on the land already acquired by the respondent no. 3 measuring 55 kanals falling under Khasra No. 97 situated at village Anji Tehsil & District Reasi.” 2. The case of the petitioners is that pursuant to Notification dated 09.10.2017, issued by respondent No. 3 under Section 9 and 9A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1990, land measuring 55 Kanals comprising under Khasra No. 97 situated at Village Anji, Tehsil & District Reasi was acquired by the respondents for public purpose (Muck Dumping) Yard No. 4 of Tunnel T-2 in Kilometer 33.212 to Kilometer 38.375 on the Katra Reasi Section of USBRL project. It is stated that respondents instead of dumping the waste material upon the aforesaid land acquired by them, have started dumping the waste material upon the land of the petitioners and upon the water springs, thereby depriving the inhabitants of the Village Anji from getting water. It is stated that respondents are damaging the agricultural land of the petitioners on which they are earning their livelihood as they have no any other source of income except the land on which the respondents are dumping the waste material. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that petitioners also approached respondent No. 3-Collector Land Acquisition (Addl. Deputy Commissioner) Reasi by way of representation to redress their grievances, but the same has not been accorded consideration. 4. During the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners would be satisfied, if respondent No. 3- Collector Land Acquisition (Addl. Deputy Commissioner) Reasi by way of representation to redress their grievances, but the same has not been accorded consideration. 4. During the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners would be satisfied, if respondent No. 3- Collector Land Acquisition (Addl. Deputy Commissioner) Reasi is directed to accord consideration to the representation of the petitioners within some time frame. There is no legal impediment in granting such relief. 5. In view of the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and in the facts of the case, the instant writ petition is disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation before respondent no. 3-Collector Land Acquisition (Addl. Deputy Commissioner) Reasi. On such representation being filed, respondent No. 3-Collector Land Acquisition (Addl. Deputy Commissioner) Reasi shall consider the same and dispose of the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order alongwith the representation. 6. With the aforementioned observations, the writ petition is disposed of along with connected MP.