Rent Assessment Orders Passed By Estate Officers Are Appealable Under J&K Public Premises Act, Writ Petitions Not Maintainable: High Court

Accordingly, the bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar dismissed two intra-court appeals, affirming that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked as a substitute for the statutory appellate mechanism.

The Division Bench was dealing with two connected Letters Patent Appeals challenging the judgment of the Single Judge whereby the appellants writ petitions had been dismissed and he was relegated to the statutory appellate forum under the 1988 Act.

Background of the Case

The dispute arose from an order dated 07.08.2017 issued by the Medical Superintendent of District Hospital, Shopian, demanding rent from the appellant for occupation of public premises. The appellant challenged the same through a writ petition (OWP No. 1514/2017), contending that the impugned order was not one passed under the J&K Public Premises Act and hence not appealable under it. The Single Judge, however, held otherwise and directed the appellant to avail the appellate remedy under the Act.

For the Appellant, Senior Advocate Mr. Z.A. Qureshi, assisted by Mr. Anuraag Verma, argued that the rent demand order was administrative in nature and not passed in the capacity of an Estate Officer under the 1988 Act. Therefore, he submitted that the appellant was entitled to invoke writ jurisdiction.

For the Respondents, Advocate Waseem Gul, Government Advocate, and Mr. Omais Kawoosa, Advocate contended that the impugned order had indeed been issued by the Medical Superintendent in his capacity as an Estate Officer under Section 10 of the Act. Hence, it was appealable under Section 12, and the writ petition was rightly dismissed, they submitted.

In a detailed oral order authored by Justice Sanjeev Kumar, the Division Bench comprehensively examined Sections 10 and 12 of the Act. The Court held,

“From the reading of Section 10, it becomes apparently clear that an Estate Officer is entitled in law to require a person in arrears of rent in respect of any public premises to pay the same within a specified period. Such an order can only be passed after giving a notice to show cause and considering the objections.”

The Court further clarified:

“Section 12 is clear and unequivocal, and it provides that any order passed by an Estate Officer under Sections 5, 7, 8 or 10 is appealable before the Appellate Officer.”

Importantly, the Court noted that the Medical Superintendent was indeed functioning as an Estate Officer and had followed the statutory procedure before issuing the rent demand. Hence, the appellant was rightly directed to seek remedy before the Appellate Authority.

The Court conclusively observed,

“In view of the clear provisions of Sections 10 & 12 of the Act and the nature of the order that has been passed by the Medical Superintendent, District Hospital, Shopian, we are of the considered opinion that the writ Court has rightly relegated the appellant to the remedy of appeal under Section 12 of the Act.”

The Court dismissed the appeal but extended a critical relief,

“If the appellant chooses to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority under Section 12 of the Act, the period spent before the Single Bench as well as the Division Bench shall be excluded from the computation of limitation.”

All legal and factual grounds were kept open for the appellant to raise in such an appeal.

In the connected LPA, the appellant's counsel submitted that the main relief had become infructuous due to subsequent developments, except for the issue relating to rent fixation. The Division Bench took note of this and dismissed the appeal as infructuous, while preserving the appellant's right to contest the rent determination before the appropriate forum.

Case Title: Amir Medical Store Vs UT Of J&K 

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 273

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment