Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court Upholds Termination of 28-Year Fair Price Shop Allotment: "Public Property Cannot Be Plundered; Policy Must Prevail Over Connivance"
Safiya Malik
The Division Bench of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh comprising Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice M A Chowdhary dismissed an appeal challenging the judgment passed in a writ petition concerning the allotment of a fair price shop in the premises of Sub District Hospital, Bishnah. The court upheld the judgment of the Single Judge, which had directed eviction, observing that the appellant had continued in possession since 1997 without any public auction. It recorded that public premises cannot be held indefinitely without adherence to government policy. The court held that the judgment under challenge did not suffer from any illegality and required no interference.
The matter concerned the challenge to the judgment dated 29.01.2025 passed in a writ petition, which had directed the eviction of the appellant from a fair price shop located in the premises of the Sub District Hospital, Bishnah. The appellant, who had been operating the shop since 13.02.1997, contended that he was entitled to continue based on Government Order No. 492-HME of 2008. This order provided conditions under which existing allottees, who had been granted shops without auction, could be considered for a further extension of two years, subject to specified financial obligations including payment of premium and enhanced rent.
The appeal was filed on the grounds that the Single Judge’s decision was erroneous and that the judgment was delivered without properly hearing the appellant. It was also alleged that counsel who appeared in the earlier proceedings was not authorized, and therefore the appellant had no knowledge of the pendency of the writ petition. The appellant argued that he had fulfilled all necessary conditions under the relevant government orders and paid rent regularly until January 2025.
The appellant further asserted that the shop had originally been allotted under Government Order No. 118-HME of 1997 dated 05.02.1997 and that his legal entitlement was reinforced by Government Order No. 492-HME of 2008 dated 17.06.2008. He submitted that the latter order permitted extension of allotments made without auction upon payment of premium equivalent to 50% of market value and a 30% increase in rent, provided the allottee submitted a bank guarantee and an undertaking to vacate after the extended period.
On these grounds, the appellant urged the court to set aside the impugned judgment and direct the respondents to consider him for a two-year extension under the conditions specified in the 2008 Government Order.
In response, counsel for the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and other official respondents submitted that the appellant had been occupying the shop for nearly 28 years without following proper procedure. They submitted that allowing continuation of such occupancy without public auction would be against public interest and government policy.
According to the respondents, the 2008 Government Order mandated that all hospital-based allotments must be conducted through a transparent public auction process. The government’s policy framework required publication of advertisements and formation of standing committees to fix minimum reserve prices. The respondents contended that allowing an extension to the appellant would contravene this policy.
It was also argued that the appellant had benefitted from extensions facilitated by local authorities, including a Rogi Kalyan Committee headed by a local legislator, thereby continuing occupation through unofficial channels.
The appellant’s counsel reiterated that his client had operated the fair price shop under valid allotments and agreements, and that the rent had been revised regularly. He maintained that the Government Order No. 492-HME of 2008 should be applied to allow a further two-year term.
The Division Bench recorded that the appellant was allotted the shop in 1997 without public auction, based on an agreement which was subsequently revised. The court noted that “it appears that the appellant had been managing the allotment of the fair price shop, which is a Govt. property in connivance with the local Block Medical Officers and also the local legislator, who is heading the Rogi Kalayan Committee, for his own designs.”
The judgment pointed out that while the 2008 Government Order did provide a framework for extensions, it simultaneously established that “all the allotments shall be made through auction by inviting sealed bids from general public through advertisement in leading newspapers.” The court found that official respondents had failed to implement these requirements for a prolonged period, but held that this did not confer any enduring rights on the appellant.
Addressing the main contention of the appellant, the court stated that “the contention of the learned senior counsel for the appellant that the appellant is entitled to be considered for extension of two years, pales into insignificance, in view of the fact that the appellant is already holding property in question, for almost more than two and a half decades.”
The Bench held that the Single Judge’s order did not contain any legal infirmity. After examining the grounds raised in the appeal and submissions from both sides, the court recorded: “we are of the considered opinion that the impugned judgment does not suffer from any illegality, so as to warrant any kind of intervention from this Bench.”
Based on its findings, the Division Bench upheld the impugned judgment in its entirety. The appeal was dismissed. The court concluded: “Viewed thus, the impugned judgment is thus, upheld. Resultantly, the appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Appellants: Mr. Gagan Basotra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Salil Gupta, Advocate
For Respondents: Mr. Raman Sharma, AAG, Mr. Aditya Gupta, Advocate
Case Title: Amar Bishnah Cooperative Medical Store and Another v. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Others
Case Number: LPA No. 58/2025 in OWP No. 1647/2015
Bench: Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice M A Chowdhary
[Read/Download order]
