Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/1655/2026 of ABDUL AHAD DAR Vs UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND OTHERS (REVENUE) on 15 September 2026
No. 2 Regular Cause List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 1655/2026 CM(4333/2026) ABDUL AHAD DAR …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s). Through: Mr. Sajid Ahmad, Advocate vice Mr. M. Y. Bhat, Sr. Advocate Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND OTHERS ...Respondent(s).
Serial No. 2
Regular Cause List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 1655/2026 CM(4333/2026)
ABDUL AHAD DAR
…Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s).
Through:
Mr. Sajid Ahmad, Advocate vice
Mr. M. Y. Bhat, Sr. Advocate
Vs.
UNION TERRITORY OF J AND
K AND OTHERS
...Respondent(s).
Through:
Mr. Zaffar Qadri, Advocate for R-4 to 6
Mr. Haris Khan, Advocate vice
Mr. Mohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG for R-1 to 3
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHD YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
15.09.2026
1. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the contesting private respondent Nos.4 to 6 Mr. Zaffar Qadri, Advocate that in view of the earlier orders passed by the competent authorities in terms of Provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Migrant Immovable Property (Preservation, Protection and Restraint on Distress Sales) Act, 1997 in the original as well as the appellate/revisional matters, the petitioner has honestly chosen to withdraw from the prosecution of this petition.
2. The appearing counsel for the petitioner Mr. Sajid Ahmad Advocate does not dispute the contention of Mr. Zaffar Qadri, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.4 to 6.
3. It is informed that the petitioner wants to take back at the appropriate time the standing trees on the subject land that had been planted by him so that same can be removed and planted at different place.
4. The learned counsel for the contesting respondent Nos.4 to 6 has got no objection in handing over the standing trees on the subject land to the petitioner as and when he needs the same.
5. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of as not pressed. However Tehsildar Pulwama- respondent No.3 is directed to allow, in his presence, the petitioner to remove the standing fruit yielding trees from the subject land in the presence of any nominated representative of the respondent Nos.4 to 6 as and when he (petitioner) is willing to receive the same within this year.
6. Disposed of.
(MOHD YOUSUF WANI)
JUDGE SRINAGAR 15.09.2026 Opinder