Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Syed Hussain Shah vs National Highway Authority Of India & … on 28 April, 2026
Author: Moksha Khajuria Kazmi
Bench: Moksha Khajuria Kazmi
Sr. No. 145
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP (C) No. 1163/2026
Syed Hussain Shah .....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. M A Bhat, Advocate
v/s
National Highway Authority of India & Ors. .....Respondent(s)
Through :- Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI with
Mr. Karan Sharma, CGSC
Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
Mr. Vipan Gandotra, Advocate
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE
ORDER
28.04.2026
1. By this petition, petitioner herein has challenged Notice bearing No.
DCP/LA/1047-50 dated 16.02.2026, insofar as, it pertains to Khasra
No. 595, which is the ownership land of the brother of the petitioner
and the business establishment of the petitioner in the form of
Retail Outlet of BPCL dealing with sale of Motor Spirit and High
Speed Diesel & Lubricants, etc.
2. In terms of the impugned notice, the father of the petitioner had
been informed/notified to provide Account/PAN details in the
office of Respondent No. 3 within a period of 15 days for
disbursement of compensation through Bhoomi Rashi Portal and
surrender or deliver the possession of the subject land to the
indenting department, failing which, the possession will be taken
with Police assistance on the expiry of the period of 15 days.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that, at the time of issuing
of the impugned notice, the petitioner has neither been heard nor
has any notice been issued to him. He further states that, though the
2 WP (C) No. 1163/2026
petitioner has stopped operating his business establishments on the
subject land, however, no action has been taken by the respondents
till date.
4. Mr. Vipan Gandotra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
National Highway Authority of India/Respondent No. 1 states that
NHA has nothing to do either with, the issuance of the impugned
notice or the award in question. As such, he prays that the
Respondent No. 1 be deleted from the array of respondents and in
its place, Union of India through Ministry of Road, Transport and
Highways should be arrayed as party respondent. Prayer is allowed.
5. Registry is directed to update the memo of parties by deleting
the National Highway Authority of India from the array of
respondents and in its place, Union of India through Ministry of
Road, Transport and Highways be arrayed as Respondent No.
1.
6. Mr. Gandotra, further states that the petitioner has already
approached the competent authority vide application dated
06.12.2024 for making a reference of his case to competent Court
under the provisions of Section 3H (4) of National Highway Act,
1956 for settlement of the dispute or in the alternative, to review the
award, strictly in compliance with the provisions of Section 3H of
the Act of 1956 and RFCTLARR Act, 2013.
7. Notice, waived by, Mr. Karan Sharma, learned CGSC appearing on
behalf of Respondent No. 2 as also on behalf of newly added
Respondent No. 1, Mrs. Monika Kohli, learned Sr. AAG appearing
on behalf of Respondents 3 & 4 and Mr. Vipan Gandotra, learned
3 WP (C) No. 1163/2026
counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 8. They seek and
are granted four weeks’ time to file response to the instant petition.
8. Now, notice shall go to Respondents 5 to 7 and 9 & 10, returnable
within a period of four weeks, subject to taking of requisite steps by
the petitioner, within a period of one week.
9. List along with WP (C) No. 1563/2025.
10. Meanwhile, subject to objections from the other side, till next date
of hearing before the Bench, respondents are directed not to
dispossess the petitioner from the land in question, without adopting
due process of law.
Alteration/modification/vacation on motion.
(Moksha Khajuria Kazmi)
Judge
JAMMU
28.04.2026
Manan
