AISHA BEGUM Vs. ADMINISTRATOR SMC SRINAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners claim to be proprietors of saw mills situate at Nowpora Tengbagh Srinagar. THEir case is that the respondent state is making survey to raise certain structures at Nowpora Tengbagh. In essence a permanent injunction is sought by medium of this writ petition to restrain the respondents from acting upon the survey report. Perusal of the writ petition reveals that the petition is likely to raise certain disputed questions of fact which I would like to skip over because at the moment I am not to consider whether writ petition will lie to establish a civil right.

(2.) FROM the averments made in the writ petition it appears that survey of the area has begun and report of the surveyor is going to propose raising of structures on the road in a manner which is likely to cause blockage. The pleadings so pressed into service by the petitioners call for determination of a question whether writ can be issued on the basis of an apprehension like the one aforementioned. To answer the question it needs to be appreciated that the surveyor has yet to make the suggestions in the form of a report and it is not possible to say what report surveyor gives and what will be the outcome of consideration the report receives at the hands of the authorities at the helm. Thus in absence of report of the surveyor and its approval by the competent authority coupled with the fact that constructional activity has yet to commence, infringement of legal and fundamental rights urged by the petitioners is a mere apprehension which cannot be the basis for grant of a writ. Question answered accordingly. The writ petition being premature is liable to dismissal. That apart, in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the High Court, activities of the State cannot be paralysed on the basis of speculations. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed in limi ne along with the CMPs.Petition dismissed.