Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. The grievance projected by the petitioner in the writ petition precisely is that land measuring 8 kanal 3 marlas belonging to one Sh. Dharam Singh, father of the petitioner and grandfather of respondent Nos. 6 & 7 was acquired at the instance of Department of Local Bodies for construction of new bus stand at Doda and an award in this regard was made by the Collector on 05.03.1985. It is claimed by the petitioner that father of the petitioner challenged the initial notification issued by the Collector under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act in this Court by way of a writ petition being OWP No.211/1981 (Dharam Singh v. Collector Doda and others), which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 10.07.1986 with a direction to the Collector to consider the prayer of the petitioner therein for retention of some portion of the land acquired. In compliance to the aforesaid order of this Court, the Government vide order No.REV(MDJ) 42 of 1992 dated 06.04.1992 leased out land measuring 8 marlas comprising in Survey No.326 min situated at Doda for a period of 40 years to the petitioner and his brother, Sh. Krishan Singh, the father of respondent Nos. 6 & 7. As is apparent from a bare reading of the aforesaid order, no premium for the allotment of the aforesaid 8 marlas of land was charged by the government for the reason that the interested persons i.e., Krishan Singh and Jagdev Singh, sons of Late Sh. Dharam Singh had not been paid any compensation for their land, which had been acquired at the instance of Director Local Bodies.

It is further submitted by the petitioner that on 03.07.1992, an agreement was executed between the petitioner on one part and the District Development Commissioner, Doda on other part, by virtue of which the petitioner was allowed to construct shops/residential house in the said leased land and accordingly, a mutation was also attested in favour of the petitioner. Although, the petitioner has claimed that it was an agreement between him and the District Development Commissioner, Doda, yet a bare perusal of the agreement, appended as Annexure-B with the writ petition, it would transpire that his brother, Krishan Singh was too party in the agreement along with the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, submits that after taking over the possession of 8 marlas of land, he applied for permission for construction of shops on the aforesaid land leased out to him by the government. He got all No Objection Certificates as are required under law from different departments and was thereafter accorded the requisite permission. The petitioner further submits that pursuant to the permission granted, he laid the plinth of five shops in April, 1993 on the land falling into his share, which has been determined mutually between the petitioner and his brother, namely Krishan Singh. He then submits that in the month of December, 1994, Chairman/ Administrator, Notified Area Committee, Doda started digging footpath in front of his proposed shops for laying foundation of shopping complex to be constructed by the Notified Area Committee, which constrained the petitioner to file a civil suit for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction against the Notified Area Committee, Doda. Again, although, the petitioner claimed that the suit was filed by him alone but copy of the order passed in the aforesaid suit placed on record by the petitioner himself as Annexure-E with the writ petition, clearly reveals that the said suit was filed jointly by Jagdev Singh and Krishan Singh. Thus, there appears to be a deliberate attempt to conceal the truth and misrepresent the facts on the part of the writ petitioner.

3. Be that as it may, the petitioner further submits that in the aforesaid civil suit, the matter landed in this Court by way of a revision petition being civil revision No.26/1995, which came to be disposed of with a direction to settle the matter in the light of proposal given by the official respondents in the aforesaid revision petition. Pursuant to the settlement arrived at between the petitioner and the Notified Area Committee, Doda and to settle the controversy once for all, respondent No.4 vide his order No.204-DLUBJ of 2004 dated 22.07.2004 read with order NO.362-DULBJ of 2004 dated 25.11.2004 allotted four shops at the ground floor and three shops at the first floor in favour of the petitioner Sh. Jagdev Singh on proprietary basis with easement right of the premises on the back side of the shops in lieu of 8 marlas of his proprietary land. On the basis of the aforesaid facts and the documents annexed with the petition, the petitioner contends that he has been in possession of the aforesaid shops for the last more than 12 years and that his possession on the aforesaid shops is continuous and settled and respondent No.4 could not have reviewed his own order and unsettle the settled position by giving half of the share in the aforesaid shops allotted exclusively to the petitioner on proprietary basis, to respondent Nos.6 & 7. He therefore, challenges the impugned order on several grounds but the grounds, which were projected during the course of arguments, may be noticed as under:-