Sr. No. 04
Final Hearing
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 1082/2020
Swarn Kanta and another
…. Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through:- Mr. Dhiraj Chowdhary, Advocate.
V/s
UT of J&K and others
…..Respondent(s)
Through:- Ms. Aparna Gupta, Advocate vice
Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG.
Mr. F.A. Natnoo, Advocate.
CORAM: RS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE
HON’BLE M
ORDER
29.02.2024
01. Petitioners have approached this Court, seeking a direction to
respondent No. 2 to dispose of the application filed by them pursuant to
which the Custodian Evacuee Property, J&K, Jammu/PRO issued notices
to respondent No. 3 vide order dated 02.05.2018 and 18.09.2019. They
also seek a direction to respondent No. 1 to take appropriate action against
the then Custodian Evacuee Property/Ex-Officio Provincial Rehabilitation
Officer, Jammu along with a direction to respondents No. 1 and 2 to
recover an amount of Rs. 4,39,752/- from respondent No. 3 and release
the same in favour of the petitioners along with interest.
02. The controversy in this petition arises from the fact that, as per the
record, the parties are siblings and displaced individuals from 1947, i.e.,
respondent No. 3 is the real brother of petitioners. The petitioners are
family members of the said displaced family, which consisted of six
members at the time of migration. The Government of India decided to
grant compensation as a one-time settlement to each family/kumba of the
2 4
WP(C) No. 1082/2020 Page of
displaced persons, amounting to Rs. 5,49,692/- (Five Lakh Forty Nine
Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Two).
03. As per the record, the family of the petitioners comprised six
individuals, namely Raj Paul Sharma, Pushpa Devi, Swaran Kanta,
Shakuntla Devi, Kewal Kumar, and Lalita Sharma. The mother of the
parties, Pushpa Kumari, passed away in 2006, and now, the petitioners'
sister, Shakuntla Devi, who was unmarried, also passed away on 24.01.2020.
After the demise of the sister and mother of the parties, the parties involved
in this petition are entitled to receive the afore-mentioned compensation in
equal proportion/share.
04. The contention of the petitioners is that their brother i.e., respondent
No. 3 approached respondent No. 2 for the release of the aforementioned
compensation in his favor and the same was transferred in his favour. The
petitioners also approached the office of respondent No. 1 for the release of
compensation in their favor, as per their entitlement, however, respondent
No. 2 informed the petitioners that he had transferred the entire
compensation amount, i.e., Rs. 5,49,692/-, in favor of respondent No. 3 to his
account at the J&K Bank.
05. The petitioner No. 3 filed a civil suit titled
‘Kewal Sharma vs. Raj
Paul Sharma and anoth
, but later, the same was withdrawn on 23.07.2018
er’
on the assurance extended by respondent No. 2. Thereafter, the respondent
No. 2 vide his communication dated 02.05.2018, on the application filed by
the petitioners, directed the respondent No. 3 to appear in his office on
18.05.2018 and again vide his communication dated 18.09.2018 directed
respondent No. 3 to deposit the cheques amounting to Rs. 1,09,938/- each in
favour of the petitioners so that the same can be disbursed in favour of the
3 4
WP(C) No. 1082/2020 Page of
petitioners. Respondent No. 3 neither responded to the same nor deposited
the amount despite the fact that respondent No. 3 did not deposit the amount
and respondent No. 2 has failed to take any action against him.
06. It appears that respondent No. 2, through communication dated
02.05.2018, directed respondent No. 3 to appear in his office on 18.05.2018.
In another communication dated 18.09.2018, respondent No. 2 directed
respondent No. 3 to deposit cheques amounting to Rs. 1,09,938/- each in
favor of the petitioners so that the funds could be disbursed to them,
however, respondent No. 3 did not respond to the same. Consequently,
feeling aggrieved by this, the petitioners filed the present writ petition.
07. Mr. F.A. Natnoo, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2, submits that
the dispute is purely a private dispute in nature. He has placed on record a
communication dated 23.02.2024 of respondent No. 2 addressed to the
Deputy Commissioner, Jammu, wherein it is stated that upon receipt of
application from the petitioners, they have requested the Deputy
Commissioner, Jammu, to initiate recovery proceedings against respondent
No. 3 namely Raj Paul Sharma, under Section 90 of the Land Revenue Act.
However, during the pendency of this petition, Raj Paul Sharma has passed
away and the outstanding amount is to be recovered yet.
08. The communication No. PRO/2023-24/512, dated 23.02.2024 is
taken on record.
09. In view of the aforesaid, as the respondents have already initiated
recovery proceedings against respondent No. 3, nothing remains to be
adjudicated in this petition. Therefore, this petition is disposed of with a
direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Jammu, to conclude the recovery
proceedings expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months by
4 4
WP(C) No. 1082/2020 Page of
passing a speaking order in this regard from the date a copy of this order
is furnished upon him.
(Sindhu Sharma)
Judge
Jammu:
29.02.2024
Michal Sharma/PS
Michal Sharma
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Srinagar
29.05.2024 10:33