Petitioner was not entitled to any compensation if the land was not acquired. The Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh before The Hon’ble Chief Justice Pankaj Mithal and The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul held such opinion regarding the case of Farooq Ahmad Teli vs. UT of J&K and others [WP(C) No.1979/2021].
The facts of the case were associated with the petitioner who claimed that he was a tenant situate in Shah Mohalla, Nawab Bazar, Srinagar. It was stated by the petitioner that under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, a notification was issued around the year 2017. The notification stated that the purpose of the land acquisition was to widen the roads and that shop was included in that. Such a writ petition was filed by the petitioner to get him compensated for the acquired shop.
Further, according to the submissions and pleadings, it was revealed that nothing was done after the issuance of notice under Section 4 of the J&K Land Acquisition Act, which stated that no further proceedings regarding acquisitions were started. Thereby, the petitioner’s land or shop was not acquired, and because of which he is not entitled to receive any compensation.
Hence, The Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh pronounced that “ … we are of the opinion that there is no cause of action for the petitioner to prefer this writ petition. However, if the petitioner has any grievance in this regard, he may submit a comprehensive representation before respondent No.6-Collector Land Acquisition, PWD, Srinagar, within two weeks and in case any such representation is filed, the respondent No.6 shall consider and pass appropriate order in accordance with law on the said representation. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.”
Judgment reviewed by Bipasha Kundu