Confusion Clouds JDA as Authorities Contradict on Land Ownership
- JDA’s senior officers statement contradicts Tehsildar’s claim, adding to confusion over ownership of crucial JDA land under Khasra Nos. 1080, 1080/2, 1081, and 1081/1 and totalling over 50 Kanals.
- Legal battles intensify as Saminder Singh alias Sourabh’s attempt to claim Prime JDA land worth 500 crores through fake and forged Mutation document leads to judicial dismissals.
- Saminders’ audacious pursuits include a fake signature scandal and a spurious case against Dr. Rohit Sharma the then Tehsildar Bahu, raising questions about the collaboration between JDA officials and land grabbers.
- The then Tehsildar Bahu Dr. Rohit Sharma’s previous verification of Sourabh’s forged documents emphasizes the need for immediate and decisive action by JDA officials, including filing an FIR against the culprit.
- The collaboration between JDA officials and land grabbers, as evident in Sourabh’s actions, demands a thorough investigation to uncover any internal involvement within the authority.
- The overall episode highlights the urgency for JDA to streamline its internal processes, enhance transparency, and fortify its commitment to protecting government land from encroachment.
jj correspondent
Jammu, Jan 28: The Jammu Development Authority (JDA) finds itself entangled in a web of confusion and contradictory statements regarding the ownership of prime land, raising concerns about the agency’s ability to reclaim encroached properties.
A controversy has been stirred among JDA officials by stating that Khasra Nos 1080, 1080/2, 1081, and 1081/1 totalling over 50 Kanals of JDA land falling in Tehsil Jammu North, do not belong to the authority. This revelation was made during a meeting with concerned officers. However, the Tehsildar of JDA contradicts this claim, asserting that these Khasra Nos indeed belong to JDA. He further reported discussions with Tehsildar Jammu (North) on the matter.
In a perplexing turn of events, the Tehsildar expressed plans for a demarcation team to visit the area, reclaim the land from encroachers, and prevent further illegal occupation. Any attempts at encroachment, he warned, would result in FIRs against the offenders. This raises serious questions about the effectiveness of such measures when there is evident confusion among JDA officials regarding land ownership.
In such a situation, how can one expect that JDA is going to retrieve or save hundreds of Kanals of land under encroachers?
The disarray within JDA becomes even more glaring in light of recent legal battles over its properties. An attempt of noted Fraudster namely Saminder Singh alias Sourabh (who already is facing more than 04 criminal FIRs primarily under offences of forgery, fraud etc) to claim ownership of Prime JDA land valued at 500 crores adjoining petrol pump, Narwal, based on fake and forged Mutation documents, adds a layer of complexity. The 1st Civil Subordinate Judge Jammu dismissed Singh’s application interim application, but the saga continued with an appeal filed before the 1st Additional District Judge, Jammu.
The 1st Additional District Judge, Jammu under File No. 132/Appeal, CNR No. JKJM020041062023 for relief while dismissing the suit found vide point No 14 that, “The Ld. Court below while passing the order impugned has dealt with on this aspect of the matter. However, judgments relied upon by the Ld. Counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs are not applicable to the facts of the case, because appellants/plaintiffs cannot be allowed to claim possession and ownership on the basis of forged and fake mutation and Khasra Girdawari entered qua the suit property.”
Upon careful examination, the court dismissed the suit, emphasizing that possession and ownership claims based on forged documents cannot be entertained.
It was only due to the timely and unambiguous report of the then Tehsildar Bahu Dr Rohit Sharma that led to initial and subsequent dismissal of the interim injunctions before Subordinate courts which Saminder Singh alias Sourabh, his mother and his brother had obtained on the basis of fake and forged Mutation.
In a fit of vengeance against Dr Rohit Sharma, Mr Sourabh and his mother opened another chapter of creating fake documents (Power of attorney) to claim prime Private land adjoining JK Medicity Hospital Jammu which was also under investigation by Dr Rohit Sharma. However, during pendency of same and in anticipation of unearthing of another criminal conspiracy by the said Officer, Sourabh Singh filed a complaint against Rohit Sharma before SSP ACB Jammu on allegations that the said officer was demanding bribe from him for issuance of Fard Intekhab. Surprisingly, cognizance of the complaint was taken by the then SSP ACB Rajouri (by exceeding territorial jurisdiction for reasons better known to him). The said complaint was based on same Fake and forged Power of Attorney, a truth which has been unveiled by country’s top investigating agency, CBI in recent charge sheet filed against Saminder Singh and his mother in the Court of CJM Jammu. However, the trap case is currently under the scrutiny of the CBI
A pressing inquiry arises concerning the actions taken by JDA officials in the aftermath of this fraudulent case. Despite the upright efforts of government officers like Dr. Rohit Sharma, who not only thwarted illicit attempts of such Land grabbers but also reclaimed around 2500 Kanals of Government land from land grabbers and demarcated around 2000 Kanals of JDA land in jurisdictions of Tehsil Bahu, questions linger about the responsibility of J.D.A in securing its land post-demarcation.
Moreover, the said officer has also been instrumental in recreation of more than 60 percent of Mussavis/ village maps of village Sunjwan and Chowadhi areas.
Furthermore, the revelation that Dr. Rohit Sharma had verified Saminder Singh’s forged mutation for attempting to acquire government land begs the question: why JDA has not promptly filed an FIR against the culprit till date? This raises concerns about the potential involvement of certain officers within JDA who may have encouraged Saminder’s design to file a corruption case against the honest and bold officer.
This situation prompts reflection on whether an officer dedicated to the betterment of the government should face retribution of this nature. The need for transparency, accountability, and a fair assessment of the collaborative actions taken by such officers and the JDA becomes imperative in ensuring justice and upholding the integrity of government proceedings.
The perplexing situation raises serious questions about the actions and responsibilities of JDA officials. Why did the JDA fail to file an FIR against Saminder Singh after verifying the fraudulent mutation? Was there any internal involvement encouraging Sourab’s actions, leading to baseless corruption allegations against a diligent officer like Dr Rohit Sharma and that too on basis of fake and forged documents?
The entire episode calls into question the effectiveness and integrity of JDA in safeguarding government land from encroachment and ensuring accountability within its ranks. As confusion prevails, the future of thousands of Kanals of JDA land remains uncertain, echoing the urgent need for clarity and decisive action within the authority.
