Housing Board cannot reopen issues settled by court while implementing judgment: HC

07/08/2026

JAMMU, Aug 6: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has quashed an order of the Jammu and Kashmir Housing Board rejecting the claim of a family for allotment of a residential plot in Ompora Housing Colony, Budgam, holding that authorities cannot reopen issues already settled by a court while implementing its judgment.
Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal allowed a writ petition filed by Vijay Koul Sapru, Poonam Sapru and Preyanka Sapru challenging Order No. JKHB-115 of 2022 dated August 10, 2022, passed by the Managing Director, J&K Housing Board. The petitioners were represented by Ms. Shivani Jalali, Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Ranjana Rajput, Advocate, while the respondents were represented by Mrs. Monika Kohli, Senior Additional Advocate General, assisted by Ms. Priyanka Bhat, Advocate.
The dispute relates to a Letter of Intent issued in 1985 in favour of late M.K. Sapru for allotment of a High Income Group residential plot in Budgam. After the allottee deposited 50 per cent of the tentative cost, no further demand was raised by the Housing Board. Following his migration from the Kashmir Valley, he sought completion of the allotment, but the Board rejected his claim in 2009, leading to prolonged litigation.
The High Court noted that in an earlier judgment delivered on October 28, 2021, it had quashed the Housing Board's communication rejecting the claim on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice and directed the authorities to reconsider the petitioners' willingness to pay the balance amount at rates prevailing in 2003. Instead, the Board again rejected the claim as time-barred and devoid of merit by reiterating grounds already rejected by the court.
Justice Nargal held that once a judicial determination has attained finality, an administrative authority cannot assume the role of an appellate forum by reopening issues already decided. The court observed that the expression "reconsider and revisit" in the earlier judgment was confined to examining the petitioners' willingness to pay the balance amount and did not authorise the Housing Board to revisit questions relating to cancellation of the allotment, newspaper publication or limitation.
The court also rejected the Board's plea that the plot had already been allotted to another person, observing that the respondents had failed to place the relevant original record before the court despite repeated opportunities, warranting an adverse inference against them.
Holding that the Housing Board had travelled beyond the mandate of the earlier judgment and virtually exercised appellate powers over a binding judicial decision, the High Court quashed the impugned order. It directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioners' claim afresh strictly in accordance with the October 28, 2021 judgment, without reopening issues already settled, and to pass a fresh, reasoned order within four weeks from the date of receipt of the judgment and related records.

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty