Blog

The  Tribunal by issuing the communication was against the mandate of the provision and the said order cannot be issued by the Tribunal during the pendency of the appeal. Such an opinion was held by The Hon’ble High Court Of Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tashi Rabstan in the matter of Abdul Gani Mir vs. Commissioner, Srinagar Municipal Corp& Ors. [WP(C)/2076/2021].

The facts of the case were associated with a notice which the counsel, Mr. Momin Khan, representing the respondents Srinagar Municipal Corporation (SMC) accepts on behalf of them. The petition was taken up for final disposal on accord with the advocate representing the parties. A writ petition was filed against the order dated 16.09.2021 by the J&K Special Tribunal. Further, a notice for filing response and records concerning the constructions was issued by the Tribunal on the basis of the impugned demolition notice. 

The Counsel representing the respondents contended that the petitioner apparently had a good case for granting interim relief, but the Tribunal granted time to another side to file objections instead of granting an interim order. A communication dated 28.-09.2021 was issued by the respondents during the pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal. It directed the Enforcement Officer, Srinagar Municipal Corporation to proceed further for demolition on the scheduled date. It was submitted by the learned counsel it is against the mandate of the provisions of issuing the communication. 

The Hon’ble High Court after considering all the submissions stated “This writ petition is disposed of with the direction to maintain status quo as on today with respect to the building in question. It is made clear that this order is only till 12.10.2021 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal is at liberty to modify or extend or pass any appropriate order on that day after hearing the parties.”

Click here to read the Judgment

Judgment reviewed by Bipasha Kundu