STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Vs. HAJI WALI MOHAMMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise out of a common judgment of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court given in four writ petitions filed by the respondents.

(2.) The respondents are stated to be purchasers of certain premises which were originally owned by Dewan Bishan Das who was a former Prime Minister of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. He had constructed several buildings and structures on the disputed property which was situated in Magharmal Bagh in Srinagar. The respondents Haji Abdul Aziz Shah and his wife, Abdul Salem Shah and Haji Mohammed Ramzan Shah purchased rights in 8 Kanals, 9 Marlas and 10,000 sq. feet of the area bearing khasra Nos. 885 and 890 by two sale deeds which were got registered in July 1967. Respondent Haji Wali Mohammed purchased rights in the land measuring 25,704 sq. feet along with buildings and garages situated in Sarai Pain near the Exhibition Grounds. According to the respondents they started their own business establishments in the properties which had been purchased. It may be mentioned that the properties had been sold by Purmesh Chander and others who were heirs of Dewan Bishan Das to the respondents. For the purpose of more detailed facts we may refer to the petition filed by the respondent Haji Wali Mohammed. It was alleged therein that in the month of December 1967 municipal buildings in Hari Singh High Street, Srinagar caught fire. The Municipality cleared the debris and took possession of the lands which became vacant as a result of the buildings having been destroyed by the fire. It was alleged that the Deputy Commissioner who was also the Estate Officer purported to issue certain notices in terms of the provisions of the Land Grants Act 1960 and the Jammu and Kashmir Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act 1959. These notices, however, were never served on the writ petitioners. Para 9 of the petition was as follows:

(3.) By means of a petition dated February 18, 1968 Haji Wali Mohammed sought to introduce some additional grounds in the writ petition. These were: