Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Jammu And Kashmir/
  4. 2024/
  5. July

Lekh Raj vs. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir Th Secretary Public Works Department

Decided on 31 July 2024• Citation: WP(C)/1283/2021• High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                                                               S.No. 10             
               HIGH   COURT    OF  JAMMU     & KASHMIR     AND   LADAKH             
                                       AT  JAMMU                                    
              Case No. :- WP (C) No. 1283/2021                                      
                       CM  No. 5248 & 5249 of 2021                                  
              Lekh Raj & Ors.                         ….. Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)
                                    Through: Mr. B R Manhas, Advocate               
                            Vs                                                      
              UT of J & K & Ors.                                                    
                                                              .…. Respondent(s)     
                                    Through: Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG             
                                             Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG                
              Coram:                         WASIM  SADIQ  NARGAL,  JUDGE           
                       HON’BLE  MR. JUSTICE                                         
                                         ORDER                                      
                                         31.07.2024                                 
              1.       The short submission which has been advanced by learned      
                       counsel for the petitioners is that the respondents without  
                       following due process as envisaged under Right to Fair       
                       Compensation   &  Transparency  in  Land   Acquisition,      
                       Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter to be 
                       referred to as        ) are conducting the survey of the     
                                    “The Act”                                       
                       land of the petitioners in question which is not permissible 
                       under law.                                                   
              2.       Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on   
                       Section 12 of the Act, a perusal whereof would reveal that for
                       the purposes of enabling the appropriate Government to       
                       determine the extent of land to be acquired, it shall be lawful
                       for any officer, either generally or specifically authorized by
                       such Government  in this behalf, and for his servants and    
                       workmen. Clauses (a) to (e) of Section 12 of the Act provides

                                           2            WP (C) No. 1283/2021        
                       that no act under clauses (a) to (e) in respect of land shall be
                       conducted in the absence of the owner of the land or in the  
                       absence of any person authorized in writing by the owner. It 
                       is also provided that the acts specified under the first proviso
                       may be undertaken in the absence of the owner, if the owner  
                       has been afforded a reasonable opportunity to be present     
                       during the survey, by giving a notice of at least sixty days 
                       prior to such survey.                                        
              3.       Mr. Manhas, further submits that neither any notice with     
                       regard to the survey of the land in question has been issued 
                       to the petitioners nor any opportunity of being heard within 
                       a time period specified under the provisions of law has been 
                       granted to the petitioners till date.                        
              4.       Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that 
                       the petitioners are not allowing the Government officials to 
                       conduct the survey and this is precisely the reason that the 
                       proceedings could not be brought to the logical conclusion.  
              5.       Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused  
                       the material available on record.                            
              6.       Since, the innocuous  prayer  has been  made   by  the       
                       petitioners that the procedure as laid down under Section 12 
                       of the Act is not being followed by the respondents in its   
                       letter and spirit, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose
                       of the instant writ petition at this stage, by directing the 
                       respondents to provide an opportunity of being heard to the  
                       petitioners within a period prescribed under Section 12 of   

                                           3            WP (C) No. 1283/2021        
                       the Act before conducting any survey. Subject to notifying   
                       the date to the petitioners in advance, the respondents are at
                       liberty to proceed in accordance with law with respect to the
                       survey of the land in question, as the respondents are under 
                       legal obligation to follow the procedure envisaged under the 
                       Act in case if they intend to acquire the land  of the       
                       petitioners in question. However, this direction is confined 
                       only to the petitioners in the instant case.                 
              7.       In the aforesaid backdrop, nothing remains to be adjudicated 
                       in the instant petition, and accordingly, the same  is       
                       disposed of along with  connected CMs,  if any, in the       
                       manner indicated above.                                      
                                                      (Wasim Sadiq Nargal)          
                                                             Judge                  
              JAMMU                                                                 
              31.07.2024                                                            
              Manan                                                                 
       Manan Mahajan                                                                
       2024.08.05 11:05                                                             
       I attest to the accuracy and                                                 
       integrity of this document