SC refuses to stay Govt Order on removal of encroachment; Asks J&K not to demolish houses on Roshni Land

New Delhi, Jan 20:
The Supreme Court of India today refused to stay an official circular issued by the Jammu &
Kashmir government directing all deputy commissioners to remove encroachment from the
State Land including Roshni Land and Kachharie land by January 31, 2023.
A bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar, though did not pass any formal order
today, it orally asked the Union Territory to not demolish any houses on Roshni Land while
declining to give benefit to those who have done illegal encroachments over the state land.
"We are not passing any orders today. You instruct them orally not to demolish any houses.
But we will not grant a general stay…. others should not g should not get benefit", the bench orally
told the counsel of J&K. During the hearing, the advocate for the petitioner argued that many tribals are
residing on the land and took the Court through the reliefs prayed for. "If stay is granted then it will benefit
land grabbers also?", Justice Shah asked.
The counsel appearing for the Union Territory clarified that the circular is mainly focused on
the Roshni land. He also questioned the locus of the applicants.
“The Application was served on me yesterday. It does not even mention that the applicants
live there”, he pointed out while adding that the said land only has shops and such
establishments.
They then adjourned the matter. The matter was mentioned before the Chief Justice DY
Chandrachud, earlier this week.
The Jammu Kashmir Government, on January 09, directed the removal of all encroachments
on State Land including Roshni Land and Kachharie Land, by January 31, 2023. The order
was passed while several review petitions challenging Roshni Act Judgement remain
pending before the High Court of Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh.
In 2020 the Jammu Kashmir High Court held that the Jammu and Kashmir State Land
(Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act 2001 Popularly known as Roshni Act is
completely unconstitutional.