Jammu and Kashmir High Court
RP/146/2021 of PREM SINGH Vs UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR TH COMMISSIONER SECRETARY REVENUE DEPTT AND OTHERS on 31 December 2021
OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU RP No. 146/2021 CM No. 9363/2021 CM No. 9364/2021 Prem Singh …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Sunil Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Navyug Sethi, Advocate Vs UT of J&K and others .…. Respondent(s) Through: Coram: HON’BLE
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKHAT JAMMU
RP No. 146/2021
CM No. 9363/2021 CM No. 9364/2021
Prem Singh
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Sunil Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Navyug Sethi, Advocate
Vs
UT of J&K and others
.…. Respondent(s)
Through:
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PUNEET GUPTA, 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
31.12.2021
RP No. 146/2021
The present review petition has been filed seeking review of the judgment and order dated 12.11.2021 passed by this court.
The first issue highlighted is with regard to a typographical error contained in the penultimate paragraph of the judgment and order wherein it is stated that instead of directing the initiation of acquisition proceedings under the “Land Acquisition Act”, this court had inadvertently reflected proceedings to be initiated under the “Land Revenue Act”.
The second issue highlighted was that during the pendency of the LPA proceedings and during the time when the LPA was reserved for judgment, the official respondents had forcibly taken over the possession from the appellants and that they should have, in the normal course, waited till the outcome of the enquiry as has been ordered by the Division Bench.
However, reference to paragraph 17 of the judgment and order dated 12.11.2021 would clearly reflect that this court had noticed the finding recorded by the writ court that the Power Development Department had already taken over the land in question and the construction was going on ever since. In that view of the matter, the assertion that it was during the pendency of the LPA proceedings that the possession was taken over may not be entirely correct.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, we feel that except the typographical error in the penultimate paragraph of the judgment and order dated 12.11.2021, no case for review is made out as there is no error apparent on the face of the record, which is required to be rectified and corrected. Insofar as the typographical error is concerned in paragraph 20(ii) of the judgment and order dated 12.11.2021, the phrase “Land Revenue Act” shall be read as “Land Acquisition Act”.
This order shall form part of the judgment and order dated 12.11.2021.
Disposed of accordingly.
Jammu 31.12.2021 Naresh
(Puneet Gupta) (Dhiraj Singh Thakur) Judge Judge