2026 PLP 313 (CLC)

FOREWORD: CHAUDHARY KHALID RASHEED, J.

The captioned writ petition has been addressed under Article 44 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution, 1974, whereby a direction is sought to the respondents to proceed in pursuance of letter dated 24.05.2019 of Director General Sports and access land survey Nos. 55 and 53 awarded under award No. 02 of 2009 may kindly be de-awarded in favour of petitioner, otherwise award of the built up property as per market value may be issued. STANCE OF PETITIONER. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the grounds already taken in the writ petition by stated that some land of the petitioner including survey Nos. 55 and 53 was acquired but built up property on the acquired land was not assessed and for that purpose upon the request of the petitioner to the respondents, the proceedings were initiated but were subsequently halted for unjustified reasons, hence the respondents be directed to de-award the land comprising survey numbers 55 and 53, otherwise the petitioner may be granted compensation of the built up property. REFUTATION OF RESPONDENTS. The legal advisor of Sports Department contended that land comprising survey numbers 55 and 53 was acquired and petitioner has received the compensation while the construction claimed by the petitioner have been raised subsequently after the award, hence cannot be compensated. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, gone through the record of the case with utmost care and caution. COURT OBSERVATIONS AND RELEVANT LAW: As per the stance taken by the petitioner, he had got a built up property in shape of RCC houses and shelter in survey number 55 min and 53 which were acquired vide award No. 02 of 2008 but compensation of the built up property was neither assessed nor paid due to insufficiency of the funds, hence the respondents are bound to pay the compensation of the built up property to the petitioner. Though it appears from the record particularly letter dated 24.05.2019 addressed by Director General Sports to Secretary Sports, Youth and Culture Azad Jammu and Kashmir and letter dated 13.01.2022 addressed by Assistant Commissioner/Collector Land Acquisition Hattian Bala to Deputy Commissioner/Collector District Hattian Bala that the petitioner has not been paid the compensation of the built up property but it is an admitted position that the petitioner filed a reference against award No. 02 of 2008 before the Reference Judge Jhelum Valley which was dismissed vide judgment dated 19.01.2017. It was also claimed by the petitioner in the reference that after award, he has received the compensation of land comprising survey numbers 53 and 55 but he has not been paid the compensation of trees. The petitioner through the amendment in the reference in the year 2015 also claimed that he has constructed three RCC houses in the acquired land and he has not been paid compensation of the said houses but this stance was not accepted by the Reference Judge. The Honourable Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir on appeal by the petitioner has observed that petitioner did not take the stance in respect of award of the houses etc. hence, cannot be allowed to raise such plea before the Apex Court. After the award of land, the proper course for the petitioner was to apply to the Reference Court that he has not been paid compensation of the built up property which stance was taken before the Reference Judge but was disallowed, hence, same relief cannot be claimed through a writ petition. The argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that only the land was acquired not the built up property, hence the same plea could have not been raised before the Reference Judge has got no plausible substance because under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act any person who has not accepted award may by written application to the Collector requires that matter be referred for determination by the Court regarding measurement of the land, amount of the compensation awarded, the person to whom it is payable or apportionment of compensation. The amount of compensation includes the factor that if the built up structure is not assessed the interested person may file a reference for compensation of the built up property as separate award of built up property is not required to be issued. As the petitioner at the time of award has not filed a reference for assessment of built up property and payment of its compensation, thus the stance taken by the respondents that the petitioner has raised construction after the award appears to be attracted and a person who raises construction after the award cannot claim compensation of the said construction. Since an alternate remedy in shape of reference before the Reference Judge for payment of compensation of built up property was available to the petitioner, which he availed, thus, the writ petition in presence of alternate remedy is not maintainable. DISPOSAL: The sum and substance of the above discussion is, finding no essence the instant writ petition is hereby dropped. MQ/24/AJK(HC) Petition dismissed.