Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Villagers of Attina Vs. State and ors.

Villagers of Attina vs State and ors.

Disposition Petition dismissed Court Jammu and Kashmir Decided Jul 29, 2008
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/900985

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Jammu and Kashmir High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Civil
Disposition
Petition dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

-

Key legal issue
Civil
Outcome / disposition
Petition dismissed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Villagers of Attina

Respondent

State and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
2008(3)JKJ174

Excerpt

- mansoor ahmad mir, j.1. the short question involved in this writ petition is whether the respondent state can be restrained from shifting of veterinary unit from one place to another.2. it is averred in the writ petition that a temporary veterinary unit came to be commissioned at village attina (beerwah) in the year 1997 in terms of annexures, a, b and c. now, the respondents are trying to shift it to village charangam (beerwah) at the behest of mla concerned.3. respondents have resisted the writ petition by the medium of reply and it is specifically stated in the reply that no veterinary unit was established in village attina but one live stock assistant from gundipora, was asked to visit village atina which is evident from annexure-a to the writ petition. further, it is stated that the establishment of centre at village charangam came to be established and commissioned in terms of the administrative instructions. thus, writ petition merits to be dismissed.4. documents-annexures-a, b and c, indicate that veterinary unit was not sanctioned but only a live stock assistant of village gundipora was asked to attend village attina twice a week. there is nothing on the file in order to make a prima facie opinion that any veterinary unit was sanctioned for the said village.5. the mla is not a party to this writ petition, thus petition deserves to be dismissed only on this count.6. the administrative action/policy matter cannot be questioned by the medium of writ petition provide the same is not against the interests of public at large and is not outcome of malafides. accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed along with all connected cmps. interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated.

Full Judgment

Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J.

1. The short question involved in this writ petition is whether the respondent State can be restrained from shifting of Veterinary Unit from one place to another.

2. It is averred in the writ petition that a temporary Veterinary Unit came to be commissioned at Village Attina (Beerwah) in the year 1997 in terms of annexures, A, B and C. Now, the respondents are trying to shift it to village Charangam (Beerwah) at the behest of MLA concerned.

3. Respondents have resisted the writ petition by the medium of reply and it is specifically stated in the reply that no Veterinary Unit was established in Village Attina but one Live Stock Assistant from Gundipora, was asked to visit village Atina which is evident from annexure-A to the writ petition. Further, it is stated that the establishment of centre at Village Charangam came to be established and commissioned in terms of the Administrative instructions. Thus, writ petition merits to be dismissed.

4. Documents-annexures-A, B and C, indicate that Veterinary Unit was not sanctioned but only a Live Stock Assistant of Village Gundipora was asked to attend village Attina twice a week. There is nothing on the file in order to make a prima facie opinion that any Veterinary Unit was sanctioned for the said village.

5. The MLA is not a party to this writ petition, thus petition deserves to be dismissed only on this count.

6. The administrative action/policy matter cannot be questioned by the medium of writ petition provide the same is not against the interests of public at large and is not outcome of malafides. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed along with all connected CMPs. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial