Srinagar: J&K High Court on Tuesday rejected a petition by a “poor” man praying sanction of a small patch of khacharai land (already in his possession) at Khawajagund, Khag, Beerwah in exchange of his proprietary land with equal valuation in the same area.
Justice Sanjay Dhar while dismissing the petition of Abdul Karim Bhat held “the exchange of proprietary land for encroached kahcharai land is not permissible now and the Deputy Commissioner concerned has no power to accept any such offer.”
He said “in the absence of any legal basis or statutory framework for considering the offer of the petitioner, it would not be open to this court to issue a writ of mandamus against the respondents to accept the offer of the petitioner”.
The petitioner sought a direction upon respondents “to grant sanction in his favour for exchange of proprietary land measuring 8 marlas under Khasra No.58 situated at village Khawajagund Tehsil Khag in lieu of khacharai land measuring 8 marlas falling under survey No. 58 situated in the same area”.
The petitioner had submitted an application in April 2015 before the Deputy Commissioner concerned for exchange of the land who in turn forwarded it to the Tehsildar concerned.
A detailed report was called from the field agencies and no objection certificates were also issued by the different departments in support of the claim of the petitioner.
“The petitioner is a poor person earning Rs 300 per day, has seven major daughters to support and that the government agencies in 2017 have reported the valuation of both the sites as equal,” pleaded his lawyer.
Justice Dhar while deciding the case said “provisions contained in Section 133(2) have undergone change, the claim of the petitioner for grant of sanction to exchange proprietary land in lieu of kahcharai land is no longer permissible under law”.
Referring to the argument of the counsel for the petitioner that the government of Jammu and Kashmir has come up with a policy for protecting the rights of small land-holders in possession of kahcharai land, the judge said no such policy has been brought on record by the petitioner nor the particulars of any such policy have even been mentioned by him.
“Even if there is any such policy, it shall be open to the respondents to deal with the case of the petitioner in accordance with such policy but the petitioner cannot seek direction upon the respondents to grant sanction for exchange of his proprietary land in lieu of kahcharai land as the same is not permissible in law,” the judge said.
