Top 5 This Week

EDITOR'S PICK

J&K High Court Rules Regional Language Newspaper Requirement for Land Acquisition Notices Can Be Dispensed With

Court invokes ‘doctrine of necessity’ citing lack of widely circulated Kashmiri-language dailies, upholds IUST Awantipora land acquisition

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has ruled that the mandatory requirement to publish land acquisition notices in a regional language newspaper can be dispensed with under the “doctrine of necessity” if no such widely circulated newspaper exists in the local language.

In a significant judgment delivered on May 21, a division bench comprising Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Sanjay Parihar allowed a review petition by the Union Territory administration, upholding the land acquisition proceedings for the Islamic University of Science and Technology (IUST) at Awantipora in Pulwama district.

Regional Language Requirement Not Absolute

The court held that where no newspaper published in Kashmiri — the regional language of the Kashmir Valley — has wide circulation in the concerned locality, the stipulation under Section 4(1)(b) of the J&K Land Acquisition Act, Samvat 1990, stands relaxed.

“…there is hardly any newspaper published in Kashmir in the Kashmiri language having wide circulation in the area. In that sense and eventuality, the doctrine of necessity would come into play,” the bench observed.

The ruling came in a review petition filed by the UT government challenging a 2021 High Court order that had quashed the acquisition of over 46 kanals of land in Awantipora village for expansion of IUST infrastructure.

Case Background

The acquisition process began in 2017 with a notification under Section 4 of the Act. The authorities published the notice in two English-language dailies — Daily Aftab and Kashmir Images — and ensured public notices were affixed in the village through revenue officials, including the Patwari.

Some affected landowners filed objections, which were considered and rejected. A final award was passed in February 2020. However, the landowners later challenged the process, arguing that the notification was invalid as it was not published in a Kashmiri-language newspaper.

In October 2021, a division bench had quashed the acquisition, citing improper publication and other procedural issues. The government appealed to the Supreme Court, which partly allowed the plea in 2023 and granted liberty to the UT administration to seek review specifically on the publication question, along with additional documents.

Substantial Compliance Sufficient

In the review judgment, the High Court held that there was substantial compliance with Section 4 requirements. The bench noted that several landowners had actual notice of the acquisition, as evidenced by their participation in filing objections and negotiations before the District Price Negotiation Committee.

Citing the Supreme Court’s 2011 judgment in Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition v. J. Sivaprakasam, the court emphasised that the object of publication is to ensure interested persons are informed and given an opportunity to object. Where this purpose is achieved through other modes and there is no prejudice, technical non-compliance does not vitiate the proceedings.

The bench distinguished the case from an earlier Supreme Court ruling in J&K Housing Board v. Kunwar Sanjay Krishan Koul (2011), describing it as fact-specific and not laying down a universal precedent.

Implications for Future Acquisitions

Legal observers said the judgment provides much-needed clarity for land acquisition cases in Jammu and Kashmir, where Kashmiri-language print media remains extremely limited.

By prioritising practical notice and substantial compliance over rigid procedural requirements, the ruling could ease infrastructure and development projects that often face legal challenges on technical grounds.

The High Court recalled its 2021 judgment and dismissed the writ petitions filed by the landowners, effectively clearing the way for the IUST land acquisition.

The petitioners in the review were represented by Senior Additional Advocate General Mohsin Qadri, while the landowners were represented by Senior Advocate G.A. Lone.

❤️ Support Independent Journalism

Your contribution keeps our reporting free, fearless, and accessible to everyone.

Supporter

99/month

Choose ₹99 × 12 months
MOST POPULAR

Patron

199/month

Choose ₹199 × 12 months

Champion

499/month

Choose ₹499 × 12 months
TOP TIER

Guardian

999/month

Choose ₹999 × 12 months

Or make a one-time donation

Secure via Razorpay • 12 monthly payments • Cancel anytime before next cycle









(We don't allow anyone to copy content. For Copyright or Use of Content related questions, visit here.)
logo

The Chenab Times News Desk

News Desk CT
News Desk CThttp://thechenabtimes.com
The Chenab Times News Desk

Popular Articles