Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
Ghulam Mohammad Rah & Ors vs Ut Of J&K & Others on 4 March, 2026
Author: Javed Iqbal Wani
Bench: Javed Iqbal Wani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND
LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
Reserved on: 18.02.2026
Pronounced on: 04.03.2026
Uploaded on: 04.03.2026
Whether operative part or
full judgment is
pronounced: Full
WP(C) No.202/2024
GHULAM MOHAMMAD RAH & ORS ...PETITIONER(S)
Through: - Mr. J. H. Reshi, Advocate.
Vs.
UT OF J&K & OTHERS
...RESPONDENT(S)
Through: - Mr. Ilyas Laway, GA,
Mr. Faheem Shah, GA.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE
JUDGMENT
1) The petitioners, in the instant petition filed under
Article 226 of the Constitution, have implored for the
following reliefs:
i. Writ of certiorari declaring the order No.
32/ACR/Acq/Ang dated 01.07. 2o23 annexed to the
writ petition as Annexure-IX passed by the
respondent No. 8 i.e., Collector Land Acquisition/ACR
Anantnag as null and void and setting aside the same
in the interest of justice and fair play.
ii. Writ of mandamus directing the respondent
No.8 i.e., Collector Land Acquisition/ACR Anantnag to
allow the petitioners to receive the amount of Rs.
289350 (Rs. Two Lac Eight Nine Thousand Three
Hundred Fifty) lying with him and payable to the
petitioners under the protest as provided under theWP(C) No.202/2024 Page 1 of 16
provisions of S.32 of the J&K land Acquisition Act 1990
(A.D. 19341).
iii. Writ of mandamus commanding the
respondent No.8 i.e., ACR Anantnag/ Collector Land
Acquisition to make reference to the court of the
Hon’ble Principal Distract Judge at Anantnag under
S.18 of the J&K Land Acquisition Act 1990 (A.D.1934)
for the determination of the compensation and other
statutory benefits and interest payable to them under
the law as sought by them ln terms of their application
dated for reference under S.18 dated 15.11.2023
annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-IX.
2) The facts, under the shade and cover of which the
aforesaid reliefs have been prayed and as are stated in the
petition, are that the petitioners owned land measuring 10
kanals 03 marlas falling under Khasra Nos.321/65, 67 and
68 situated at Nunwan, Pahalgam, which land came to be
acquired by Pahalgam Development Authority (for short
“the Authority”) through Collector Land Acquisition/ACR,
Anantnag, respondent 8 herein, and though an award came
to be passed by the respondent 8 herein on 15.05.1982, yet
the same was passed at the back of the petitioners without
their knowledge and without any notice to them as was
required to be issued under the provisions of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1990 (1934 AD) (hereinafter referred to as
“the Act of 1990”) and that the moment the said award came
into the notice of the petitioners and other land owners
whose land was acquired, they approached the Deputy
Commissioner, Anantnag, respondent 6 herein, for grant of
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 2 of 16
alternate land instead of monetary compensation asprovided under Section 32 of the Act of 1990, in that,
similar other landholders having been provided such
alternate land.
It is further stated that though the case of the
petitioners for providing them alternate land was processed
and a suitable state land was identified by the respondents,
yet the respondents did not take any final decision thereof
compelling the petitioners to approach this Court through
the medium of a writ petition being OWP No.632/2015, in
response to which petition the respondents in the
objections filed thereto pleaded that no suitable land is
available with the Government at present which could be
provided to the petitioners in exchange of their acquired
land, as a consequence whereof, the Court disposed of the
said writ petition vide judgement and order dated
04.10.2017 providing therein for payment of compensation
payable to the land owners in terms of the final award
passed by the Collector along with interest as payable
under Section 35 of the Act of 1990 while also providing a
liberty to the petitioners to avail the remedies as may be
available to them under the provisions of the Act of 1990.
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 3 of 16
It is next stated that the aforesaid judgment and order
dated 04.10.2017 along with an application came to be
served upon the respondent 8 herein besides other
respondents well in time, which, however, was not complied
with compelling the petitioners to file a contempt petition
being Contempt No.307/2018.
It is further stated that during the pendency of
aforesaid contempt petition, J&K Reorganization Act, 2019,
came into being, as a consequence whereof the Act of 1990
got repealed by the “Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013” (for short ‘the Act of 2013’) and
that since no land in exchange was provided to the
petitioners and also that no reference under Section 18 of
the Act of 1990 could be made by them on account of non-
payment of compensation in terms of the award by the
respondents, the petitioners herein also, in view of the
coming into being of the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019,
filed an application before this Court and withdrew the
aforesaid contempt petition (CPOWP No.307/2018), which
came to be allowed by this Court in terms of order dated
06.05.2022, whereafter the petitioners preferred another
writ petition being WP(C) No.1450/2022 before this Court
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 4 of 16
for enforcement of their rights and claims under the Act of
2013 qua the land acquired by the respondents, which writ
petition, however, came to be withdrawn by the petitioners
in the light of passing of the judgment by the Apex Court
holding that the acquisition proceedings initiated in the
erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir prior to the coming
into being of the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019, will
continue to be governed by the Act of 1990.
It is also dated that upon withdrawal of said petition
(WP(C) No.1450/2022), the petitioners got the contempt
proceedings initiated earlier revived by maintaining
contempt petition being CCP(S) No.510/2022 in OWP
No.632/2015, which contempt proceedings eventually
came to be concluded by the Court on 26.05.2023 on the
basis of the stand taken by the respondents that the
compensation and interest payable to the petitioners in
terms of the judgment and order dated 04.10.2017 passed
in OWP No.632/2015 has been deposited by the Collector
with the Principal District Judge, Anantnag, and that the
same has been disbursed in favour of the petitioners.
It is next stated that since the respondents had stated
that the compensation payable to the petitioners had been
deposited with the Principal District Judge, Anantnag, as
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 5 of 16
such, the petitioners filed an application before the
Principal District Judge, Anantnag, on 10.06.2023 for
release of the amount of compensation, however, the said
application came to be returned back to the petitioners on
27.10.2013, on the ground that the amount of
compensation has been returned back to the Collector,
respondent 8 herein.
It is further stated that thereafter the petitioners
submitted an application on 15.11.2023 before the
respondent 8 herein for release of compensation as also for
making of a reference provided under Section 18 of the Act
of 1990, which application, however, was not decided by the
respondents and instead the petitioners came to be
informed through order dated 01.07.2023 by the
respondent 8 that their earlier application for seeking
reference stands decided.
3) Reply to the petition in the shape of para-wise reply
has been filed by the respondents wherein it is being
admitted that the land of the petitioners and other land
holders was acquired after following due process of law and
in furtherance thereof the petitioners were called upon to
appear personally or through authorized agents for filing
their objections, interest in the said land and the amount
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 6 of 16
and particulars of their claim to compensation and that the
objections submitted thereof were duly considered and
disposed of. It is further stated that the application referred
in the petition claimed to have been submitted by the
petitioners through their counsel on 27.10.2017 remained
pending before the respondents only on account of
pendency of the previous litigation between the petitioners
and the respondents herein and that the said application
dated 27.10.2017, a reference under Section 18 of the Act
of 1990 had been sought and the said application came to
be disposed of in terms of order dated 01.07.2023 and that
the petitioners have been seeking reference under Section
18 qua the award passed on 15.05.1982 beyond the
stipulated period provided under Section 18 of the Act of
1990 and, as such, the said application was rejected as
being time barred and that since the petitioners failed to
seek making of reference under Section 18 of the Act of
1990 within the stipulated period, the petitioners cannot
now seek any relief from this Court in this regard and that
in terms of judgment and order dated 04.10.2017 passed in
OWP No.632/2015, the respondents were duty bound to
release the compensation in favour of the petitioners as per
the directions passed therein and that even thereafter the
petitioners were called upon number of times to attend the
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 7 of 16
office, either personally or through authorized agents for
receiving compensation and that despite having received
notices by some of the petitioners, the petitioners did not
attend the office of the respondents for receiving
compensation.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4) Before proceeding to advert to the case set up by the
parties in their respective pleadings and also the rival
submissions of the appearing counsel for the parties, it
would be advantageous and appropriate to refer to Section
18 and 32 of the Act of 1990 hereunder being relevant
herein;
18. Reference to Court.
(1)Any person interested who has not accepted the
award may, by written application to the Collector
require that the matter be referred by the Collector for
the determination of the Court, whether his objection
be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the
compensation, the persons to whom it is payable or the
apportionment of the compensation among the
persons interested.
(2)The application shall state the grounds on which
objection to the award is taken:
Provided that every such application shall be made:-
(a)if the person making it was present or represented
before the Collector at the time when he made his
award, within six weeks from the date of the Collector’s
award;
(b)in other cases, within six weeks of the receipt of the
notice from the Collector under section 12, sub-section
(2), or within six months from the date of the
Collector’s award, whichever period shall first expire.
xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 8 of 16
32. Payment of compensation or deposit of same in
Court.
(1)On making an award under section 11, the Collector
shall tender payment of the compensation awarded by
him to the persons interested/entitled thereto,
according to the award, and shall pay it to them unless
prevented by some one or more of the contingencies
mentioned in the next sub-section.
(2)If they shall not consent to receive it, or if there be
no person competent to alienate the land, or if there
be any dispute as to the title to receive the
compensation or as to the apportionment of it, the
Collector shall deposit the amount of the
compensation in the Court, to which a reference under
section 18 would be submitted:
Provided that any person admitted to be interested
may receive such payment under protest as to the
sufficiency of the amount:
Provided also that no person who has received the
amount otherwise than under protest shall be entitled
to make any application under section 18:
Provided also that nothing herein contained shall affect
the liability of any person who may receive the whole
or any part of any compensation awarded under this
Act to pay the same to the person lawfully entitled
thereto.
(3)Notwithstanding anything in this section, the
Collector may, with the sanction of the Government,
instead of awarding a money compensation in respect
of any land, make any arrangement with a person
having a limited interest in such land, either by the
grant of other lands in exchange, the remission of land
revenue on other lands held under the same title or in
such other way as may be equitable having regard to
the interest of the parties concerned.
(4)Nothing in the last foregoing sub section shall be
construed to interfere with or limit the power of the
Collector to enter into any arrangement with any
person interested in the land and competent to
contract in respect thereof.
5) Keeping in mind the aforesaid provisions of law and
reverting back to the case in hand, it is not forthcoming
from the record annexed by the respondents with the reply
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 9 of 16
filed to the petition, inasmuch as produced during thecourse of hearing of the case by the counsel for the
respondents, that the petitioners came to be informed by
the respondents about passing of the award dated
15.05.1982 or else suggesting that the petitioners were
informed to receive the compensation qua their acquired
land.
6) It is not in dispute as well that this Court, while
disposing of OWP No.632/2015 supra on 04.10.2017, held
that the prayer of the petitioners made for directing the
Collector to provide them land in exchange cannot be
granted in view of the specific stand taken by the
respondents that there is no suitable land available for the
purpose, yet the Court held that the petitioners cannot be
deprived of the compensation payable to them in terms of
award dated 15.05.1982, while observing that the Collector
is under a statutory obligation to immediately and forthwith
deposit the awarded amount the moment he passes the
final award and to give a notice to the persons interested
and entitled to the compensation under the award to collect
the same. It also emanates from the said judgement and
order dated 04.10.2017 that the court while finally
disposing of the petition directed the Collector to release the
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 10 of 16
compensation awarded in favour of the petitioners in terms
of award dated 15.05.1982 holding the petitioners also
entitled to statutory interest provided under Section 35 of
the Act of 1990 besides providing a liberty to the petitioners
to avail the remedies as may be available to them under the
provisions of the Act of 1990.
7) A closer examination of the available record would
reveal that the petitioners, seemingly submitted an
application before the respondent 8 herein on 27.10.2017
through the counsel subsequent to the passing of the
judgment and order by the Court on 04.10.2017, making a
request therein for payment of compensation for enabling
them to receive the same “under protest” and to seek
reference thereof to the civil court for determination of
market value of the acquired land under Section 18 of the
Act of 1990. The said application in essence has never been
an application for seeking reference under Section 18.
8) Record also bears testimony to the fact that the
respondents had taken a stand before this Court in the
contempt petition being CCP(S) No.510/2022 having been
filed by the petitioners qua disobedience of order dated
04.10.2017 that the amount of compensation stands
forwarded to District Treasury, Anantnag, on 7th May, 2022
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 11 of 16
for depositing of the same in the bank account of Principal
District Judge, Anantnag, for its onward disbursement to
the petitioners and that the petitioners, in fact, have
received the compensation, resulting into closing the
proceedings therein the said contempt petition in terms of
order dated 29.05.2022, thereby manifestly suggesting that
till May, 2022, the amount of compensation had not been
paid to the petitioners by the respondents even in terms of
judgement and order dated 04.10.2017.
9) Perusal of the record also tends to show that the
Principal District Judge, Anantnag, while dealing with the
application filed by the petitioners herein on 10.06.2023 for
release of the said compensation, disposed of the said
application and consigned the same to records on the
premise that the amount of compensation of Rs.289350/
having been credited in the account of the said Court on
02.08.2022 came to be ordered to be returned back to the
Collector, Anantnag, in view of non-pendency of any
reference proceedings, endorsing the plea of the petitioners
that the amount of compensation was never paid to them
by the respondents, despite demands made in this regard.
10) Further perusal of the record also reveals that the
respondents claim to have served multiple notices upon the
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 12 of 16
petitioners, some of which are annexed with the para wise
reply filed by the respondents are dated 27.12.2023, also
authenticating the plea of the petitioners that they were
never paid the amount of compensation by the respondents
either after the passing of the award or else after the
passing of judgment and order dated 04.10.2017. It is
seemingly in this context, the petitioners had submitted an
application before the respondent 8 herein on 15.11.2023
calling upon him to make a reference to Principal District
Judge, Anantnag, which application is not disputed to have
been received by the respondent 8 herein but is said to have
been earlier considered and rejected earlier i.e. the
application which had been filed on 27.10.2017 by the
petitioner through their counsel and while risking
repetition, the perusal of contents of which application do
not suggest that the same was an application seeking
reference under Section 18 of the Act of 1990, but was only
an application made for making of payment of
compensation to the petitioners in order to enable them to
receive the same “under protest” for seeking making of a
reference thereof.
11) It is significant to mention here that the provisions of
Section 18 of the Act of 1990 has in law been held to be a
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 13 of 16
valuable right of the person whose land has been acquired
and that in the process of deciding an application seeking
reference to the civil court, the basic principles of natural
justice are to be observed and the sine qua non for invoking
the provisions of Section 18 read with Section 32 of the Act
of 1990 envisage that the person interested must have
notice of the award and also must have received the
compensation “under protest” and that in order to dispute
the right of reference of such interested person, it has to be
established that the notice of the award was issued to the
claimant and the claimant had the knowledge of the award
and that the compensation was received by the claimant
voluntarily or else “under protest”.
12) As has been observed in the preceding paras and also
what emanates from the record, the chain of events reveal
that the respondents did not actually pay compensation to
the petitioners and the petitioners had not actually received
the same be it voluntarily or “under protest” for enabling
them to invoke the provisions of Section 18 read with
Section 32 of the Act of 1990, and that the delay in
maintaining an application for making reference under
Section 18 read with Section 32 of the Act of 1990 by the
petitioner has not been on the part of the petitioners and
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 14 of 16
that the respondents have not rejected the actual
application filed by the petitioners for seeking reference
under Section 18 of the Act of 1990, but instead an
application dated 27.10.2017, whereunder the petitioners
had sought release of compensation in their favour to
receive the same “under protest” for enabling them to seek
reference under Section 18 of the Act of 1990.
13) Therefore, having regard to the aforesaid position
obtaining in the matter, it can safely be concluded that the
impugned order dated 01.07.2023 is grossly misconceived
and misplaced thus, requiring the respondents to treat the
application filed by the petitioners on 15.11.2023 as an
application under Section 18 of the Act of 1990 and
accordingly make a reference thereof to the Principal
District Judge, Anantnag.
14) Viewed thus, for what has been observed, considered
and analyzed hereinabove, the instant petition succeeds, as
a consequence whereof, impugned order dated 01.07.2023
is quashed and the respondent 8 herein is commanded to
forward application dated 15.11.2023 forming Annexure-IX
to the petition to Principal District Judge, Anantnag, as
observed above.
WP(C) No.202/2024 Page 15 of 16
15) Let the aforesaid exercise be undertaken and
concluded within a period of six weeks from the date a copy
of this judgment and order is served by the petitioners upon
the respondents.
16) Record produced by the counsel for the respondents
be returned back after retaining a copy of the same on the
record of the instant file.
(Javed Iqbal Wani)
Judge
Srinagar
04.03.2026
“Bhat Altaf-Secretary”
Whether the Judgment is speaking: Yes
Whether the judgment is reportable: YesWP(C) No.202/2024 Page 16 of 16