Kahcharai Land Is State Property, No Individual Right To Claim Compensation For Its Acquisition For Public Purpose: J&K&L High Court
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that kahcharai land, being State-owned land reserved for common and community use, does not confer any individual proprietary interest, and compensation for its acquisition is payable to the concerned Panchayat for the welfare of the local community, not to private individuals.
The Court dismissed a writ petition seeking compensation for alleged utilization of proprietary land for construction of a road under the MGNREGA scheme, holding that the demarcation report conducted pursuant to judicial directions categorically established that the road traversed only through Kahcharai land and State land, and that no proprietary land belonging to the petitioners was utilized. The Court reiterated that kahcharai land is the property of the Government and no individual has any right or interest over such land.
The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by one Mohd. Sultan Dar and others seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to demarcate their land and pay compensation of Rs. 50 lakhs for the land allegedly utilized for construction of an ADP Road under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) Scheme.
A Bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal, while observing that “kahcharai land, being State-owned land reserved for common and community use, does not confer any individual proprietary interest upon the petitioners. Consequently, the petitioners cannot lay any lawful claim to compensation in respect thereof,” held that the petitioners failed to establish any infringement of their proprietary rights, and therefore the question of payment of compensation did not arise.
Background of the Case:
The petitioners claimed to be owners in possession of a parcel of land in District Kulgam, recorded as Abi Awal in the revenue records. The respondents issued a Notification for construction of an ADP Road under the MGNREGA Scheme. The petitioners alleged that approximately 25 Marlas of their land was utilized for construction of the road without demarcation, acquisition, or payment of compensation. They approached the Tehsildar seeking demarcation, but according to them, no action was taken.
The petitioners further alleged that the road was constructed primarily for the benefit of certain private individuals acting in concert with official respondents, and that the action amounted to deprivation of property without authority of law.
The respondents filed a reply stating that the petition was based on suppression of facts and that no proprietary land of the petitioners was utilized for the road. Pursuant to directions of the Court, the Deputy Commissioner, Kulgam got the land demarcated and submitted a status report.
Court's Observation:
The Court noted that the entire claim of the petitioners rested upon the assertion that a portion of their proprietary land had been utilized for construction of the road. To ascertain this, the Court had vide an earlier order directed the Deputy Commissioner to get the land demarcated.
The status report filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Kulgam, based on Demarcation Report submitted by the Tehsildar, Qaimoh, categorically stated that the ADP Road traverses exclusively through Survey Nos. recorded as Kahcharai land, recorded as State land. The report unequivocally recorded that no proprietary land belonging to the petitioners has been utilized for construction of the said road.
The Court observed that the petitioners had not placed any cogent material to discredit the findings recorded in the demarcation report prepared by the competent revenue authority pursuant to judicial directions.
Referring to its earlier judgment in Villagers of Anzwalla v. State (2012 (3) JKJ 213), the Court reiterated that Kahcharai land is the property of the Government and that petitioners have no individual rights or interest on such land. The Court quoted, “... Kahcharai Land is the property of the Government; therefore, the petitioners have no individual rights or interest on the said land. The Government is within its powers to acquire it, when the same is for the public purpose.”
The Court further relied upon Habibullah Sheikh v. State of J&K (2009 (1) SLJ 150), wherein it was held that if kahcharai land is acquired, the compensation is payable to the concerned Panchayat in whose jurisdiction the land falls, as it is the property of the community, and that the writ petitioners filing in individual capacity cannot seek any relief.
Justice Nargal remarked,
“The right to claim compensation is intrinsically linked to the existence of legally recognized proprietary rights in the land sought to be acquired. Such a right accrues only in respect of proprietary land where ownership is vested in an individual or entity in accordance with law. In contradistinction, kahcharai land, being State-owned land reserved for common and community use, does not confer any individual proprietary interest upon the petitioners.”
On the plea based upon Article 300-A of the Constitution, the Court held that deprivation of property is a condition precedent for invocation of the constitutional protection, and in the present case no deprivation of the petitioners' property was established.
Holding that since no infringement of any proprietary right of the petitioners was established, the court opined that the question of payment of compensation did not arise. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed being bereft of merit.
Case Title: Mohd. Sultan Dar & Ors. v. UT of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL)