Expansion of Jammu Airport case
Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Apr 20: In the Jammu Airport expansion case, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has condoned the delay and restored petition with costs Rs 10,000.
During the course of hearing Advocate Inderjeet Gupta with Advocate Yatin Gupta appearing for AAI submitted that petitioners had filed OWP No 684 of 2011 titled Amrik Singh & Another Versus State & Others seeking alternate land from the Government despite the fact that the petitioners are not the owner of the land mentioned in the Writ Petition and that land is Government land which has been transferred to Airport Authority vide Cabinet Decision dated 18/07/2000.
Petition came up for hearing on 11/11/2020 and due to the absence of the petitioners and their counsels the petition was dismissed on the ground that rehabilitation of all the oustees has been resolved by the court vide various orders passed in PIL No. 35 of 2018 titled Ravi Abrol Versus Union of India & Others.
During COVID-19 all the advocates were attending the courts through virtual mode. It is the petitioners and their counsel who have chosen not to appear in OWP No. 684 of 2011. In the circumstances High Court was left with no alternative and accordingly High Court dismissed the OWP No. 684 of 2011.
After hearing Advocate JP Sharma for the petitioner Amrik Singh and others whereas Advocate Inderjeet Gupta with Advocate Yatin Gupta appearing for AAI, Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul observed, “by the medium of CM No.6264/2022, the applicant seeks condonation of delay in filing the restoration application and grounds taken in the application are that the petition was dismissed during the Corona period. He submits that the delay requires to be condoned in terms of order of the Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020 titled In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation”.
“Even if COVID period is excluded, there is still delay in seeking restoration of the writ petition as delay is from March, 2022 to October 2022. Though the grounds taken in the application do not constitute sufficient and reasonable grounds which prevented the applicant form seeking restoration after the COVID period, however, in the interest of justice, delay is condoned subject of payment of Rs 10,000 as costs to be deposited with the Advocate’s Welfare Fund. Costs shall be paid within a period of one month”, High Court said.
Follow our WhatsApp channel