According to the verification report, a copy of which lies with the Kashmir Observer, SMC had initially issued building permissions Nos.
891 of 2006 dated November 4, 2006, on the ground that the land had been notified for acquisition for construction of a public park.
Following the court order, the then Joint Commissioner Planning, SMC, restored the two building permissions through Order No.
The ACB alleged that the changes were made in violation of the Srinagar Master Plan 2000-2021 and applicable building bye-laws.
Despite this, building permissions were issued in 2006, the ACB alleged.
Photo: Screengrab from video
Srinagar – The Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) has registered a case against several government officials and beneficiaries over alleged irregularities in the grant and subsequent modification of building permissions for a multi-storey commercial building in the flood basin and river-fringe area of Rajbagh here, officials said on Wednesday.
The FIR, registered as Case/FIR No. 10/2026 by ACB Srinagar, follows a Joint Surprise Check and subsequent verification into allegations that the building, identified as “Trends” and located opposite Hatrick restaurant in Rajbagh, was constructed in violation of planning, building and flood-control regulations.
ADVERTISEMENT
According to the ACB, the verification prima facie revealed alleged abuse of official position, criminal conspiracy and facilitation of unauthorised construction, besides encroachment of about 2.9 kanals of State/Kahcharai land.
The probe also allegedly found construction over drainage infrastructure and within the prohibited river-fringe area of the Jhelum.
ADVERTISEMENT
Those named in the FIR include the then Senior Town Planner, Srinagar Development Authority, Muneer Ahmad Khan; then Joint Commissioner Planning, Srinagar Municipal Corporation, R K Tutoo; then In-charge Assistant Town Planner, SMC, Ulfat Jan; and beneficiaries Gulzar Ahmad Sheikh and his wife, Parveena Akhter.
Other officials found to have a role in the alleged irregularities have also been proceeded against, the ACB said.
The case has been registered under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the J&K Prevention of Corruption Act, Svt., 2006, and Sections 447-A, 468 and 120-B RPC, along with other applicable provisions.
The investigation has been entrusted to an authorised officer of ACB Srinagar.
According to the verification report, a copy of which lies with the Kashmir Observer, SMC had initially issued building permissions Nos. 1052 dated January 18, 2006, and 724 dated September 20, 2006, in favour of Gulzar Sheikh, son of Habibullah Sheikh, a resident of Kanipora, Shopian, and his wife, Parveena Akhter, presently residing at Sanat Nagar, Srinagar.
The permissions were subsequently withdrawn through SMC Order No. 891 of 2006 dated November 4, 2006, on the ground that the land had been notified for acquisition for construction of a public park.
The withdrawal order was later quashed by the Jammu and Kashmir High Court on September 11, 2013.
Following the court order, the then Joint Commissioner Planning, SMC, restored the two building permissions through Order No. 02 of 2015 dated October 17, 2015.
The ACB, however, alleged that the beneficiaries did not commence construction in accordance with the restored sanctioned plans and instead sought modification of the permissions.
The modified permission, No. 80 of 2017 dated July 18, 2017, was subsequently issued by Tutoo, according to the verification.
The modification allegedly resulted in a substantial increase in the sanctioned plinth area from around 8,100 square feet to 10,260 square feet, while the permissible height was increased from 50 feet to 70 feet.
The ACB alleged that the changes were made in violation of the Srinagar Master Plan 2000-2021 and applicable building bye-laws.
The verification further found that mandatory No Objection Certificates (NOCs) from concerned line departments had allegedly not been obtained before the modified building permission was issued.
The then-in-charge Assistant Town Planner, Ulfat Jan, allegedly recommended the modification involving the addition of the fourth and fifth floors without obtaining the requisite NOCs, following which the modified permission was approved by the then Joint Commissioner Planning, the ACB alleged.
The probe also examined clearances relating to flood-control regulations.
According to the verification, the Chief Engineer, Irrigation and Flood Control Department, had issued a conditional clearance in 2005, vide communication No. 3396-97 dated October 13, 2005.
The clearance reportedly noted that the site was situated near the inner slope of the river body and fell within a flood-prone area, with conditions and restrictions attached to the clearance.
Despite this, building permissions were issued in 2006, the ACB alleged.
The verification further noted that following the devastating floods of 2014, the then Chief Engineer, Irrigation and Flood Control Department, Er Mir Javid Jaffer, had cancelled all previously issued NOCs through Circular No. 366-406 dated October 28, 2014.
A subsequent report of the department, bearing No. CE/I&FCDK/10126-28 dated October 8, 2025, allegedly confirmed that no fresh or subsequent NOC had been issued in respect of the subject survey numbers.
The ACB also examined the land-use classification of the property.
It alleged that Muneer Ahmad Khan, then Senior Town Planner, SDA, had, through a communication dated April 15, 2005, projected the subject land as falling in Commercial Zone (C-30), despite the land allegedly forming part of a water body under the Srinagar Master Plan 2000-2021.
The bureau is also examining the alleged encroachment of approximately 2.9 kanals of State/Kahcharai land and the construction carried out over drainage infrastructure and within the river-fringe/flood-basin area.
The ACB said the registration of the FIR followed a detailed verification of the allegations and that the investigation is underway to establish the role and criminal liability, if any, of the officials and beneficiaries concerned.
The registration of an FIR does not by itself establish guilt, which will be determined in accordance with law.
