Migrant Industrialist Wronged: Jammu Kashmir High Court Raps State for ‘Predatory’ Conduct, Orders Fresh Relief | Kashmir Life

SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh has come down strongly on the Jammu and Kashmir administration for its handling of a migrant industrial unit’s case, observing that the State “acted as a predator rather than a protector” while dealing with property left behind during the 1990 migration.

In a judgment delivered on April 18, Justice Rahul Bharti disposed of a long-pending writ petition filed by M/s Sports Goods Industry, a small-scale unit established in Srinagar in 1978, and directed authorities to provide equitable relief to the petitioner.

The petitioner, a proprietorship concern run by KL Ambardar, had been allotted an industrial shed at Bagh-i-Ali Mardan Khan Industrial Area in Srinagar. The unit commenced operations in 1989 but was abandoned soon after as the proprietor migrated to Jammu amid the mass exodus of Kashmiri Pandits due to security concerns.

During the period of abandonment, the unit reportedly suffered extensive damage in a 1991 fire. Subsequently, the original industrial shed was re-allotted by authorities to another private entity, prompting the petitioner to initiate legal proceedings.

Earlier, in 2000, the High Court had directed the government to either restore the original shed or allot a similar alternative. While the authorities offered two sheds at the Industrial Estate in Rangret, the petitioner contested the terms, arguing that the allotment was made on fresh commercial conditions, including premium charges and higher rent, instead of being treated as a continuation of the original allotment.

The dispute escalated through multiple contempt petitions, with the petitioner alleging non-compliance and “eyewash” by the authorities. In 2004, the allotment of alternate sheds was cancelled by the government, citing failure by the petitioner to complete formalities.

Examining the sequence of events, the court held that the State failed in its obligation to safeguard the petitioner’s property during a period of forced migration. It observed that the authorities ignored the extraordinary circumstances under which the petitioner had to abandon the unit and instead proceeded to cancel and re-allot the property.

“The absence of the petitioner due to threat to life should have been a ground for protection, not exploitation,” the court noted, adding that principles of natural justice were disregarded.

While acknowledging the passage of time and changed circumstances, the court sought to balance equities by directing the government to allot two industrial sheds to the petitioner at Rangret, if available, or provide equivalent alternatives.

Importantly, the court ordered that no premium be charged for such allotment and that rent be levied only prospectively from the date the petitioner takes possession, without insisting on arrears.

The ruling brings closure to a dispute spanning over two decades, highlighting the legal and administrative challenges faced by migrants who left behind businesses and properties during the turmoil in Kashmir.