Relaxed Rules Over Locus Standi In Public Interest Cannot Be Used To Indirectly Challenge Concluded Litigation: J&K&L High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging the regularisation of a minor deviation in a building's sanctioned plan by the Srinagar Municipal Corporation (SMC), holding that the petitioner had no locus standi and the matter was an abuse of process.A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal said, "It acknowledges the liberalization of standing in...
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging the regularisation of a minor deviation in a building's sanctioned plan by the Srinagar Municipal Corporation (SMC), holding that the petitioner had no locus standi and the matter was an abuse of process.
A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal said, "It acknowledges the liberalization of standing in matters involving public interest or systemic illegality, such relaxation cannot be applied in a blanket fashion to permit indirect challenges to concluded litigation by persons who were neither party to the original lis nor directly affected by the outcome thereof."
The court noted that the petitioner was neither a party to the earlier proceedings before the Special Tribunal nor directly affected by the deviation, which was just 118 sq. ft., around 7% of the permitted area. The deviation had been compounded and regularised by the competent authority in November 2024 after due process.
“Public interest cannot be a cloak for personal grievances or speculative apprehensions,” the Court said, observing that the petitioner had not demonstrated any specific legal injury or procedural illegality.
The Court emphasised that locus standi is not a mere technicality but goes to the root of judicial scrutiny under Article 226. While standing rules are relaxed in genuine public interest cases, such relaxation cannot be applied “in a blanket fashion to permit indirect challenges to concluded litigation”.
The Court reiterated that third parties cannot re-open disputes between others unless there is systemic failure or breach of fundamental obligations, which was not shown here.
Rejecting the plea that the Tribunal ignored objections in the 2022 demolition notice, the Court held that relevant aspects like land use and deviation extent were examined, and “mere non-reproduction of each objection” did not vitiate the decision.
Finding no arbitrariness or procedural impropriety, the Court refused to interfere with either the Tribunal's May 2024 order or the SMC's regularisation decision, and dismissed the petition with connected applications.
APPEARANCE:
Case-Title: Noor Mohammad Dar vs Srinagar Municipal Corporation & Ors, 2025
Jahangir Iqbal Ganai, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Mehnaz Rather, Advocate on behalf of respondent No.7 Mr. Bikramdeep Singh, Dy. A.G for respondent No.1 to 6