A long-running land dispute in Jizzakh, Uzbekistan, has reignited, pitting a local entrepreneur against residents and a homeowners' association over a 2.2-hectare plot in the Jizzaklik neighborhood. Entrepreneur Zafar O'ralov claims rights to 586 square meters based on a 2009 city mayor's decision, while residents and the 'Jizzakh Super Service' homeowners' association (HOA) argue the land was legally allocated to them in 2015 for landscaping and beautification of the residential area.
The roots of the conflict trace back to the 1990s, when seven or eight small shops operated on a 105-square-meter section of the land. Said Soibnazarov, head of the HOA, recalls, 'They were like counters. One sold ice cream, another soft drinks. They had cadastral registration only for the property, not for the land.' By 2006, only one shop remained, and in 2012, its owner demolished it entirely.
In 2015, then-mayor Asror Qobilov issued a decree allocating the 2.2-hectare plot to the HOA for community improvement, including the former shop area. Over time, pine trees were planted there. In January 2022, construction equipment suddenly appeared on the site, and workers began pouring concrete. It soon emerged that O'ralov was behind the works, citing the 2009 decree that granted him the 586-square-meter plot for building additional structures.
Residents protested and took the case to court. In April 2022, the Jizzakh inter-district court ruled in favor of O'ralov, recognizing his right to the disputed land and ordering the HOA to cease interference. However, the Supreme Court, after a prosecutor's appeal, overturned these decisions in August 2022, noting that O'ralov had failed to register his land rights and had not built within the two-year deadline stipulated in the 2009 decree. The land remained with the HOA.
The Supreme Court's ruling cited a 2022 expert conclusion from the State Cadastre Committee stating that O'ralov's rights had not legally come into force due to lack of state registration. The plot was subsequently fully registered to the HOA. Residents celebrated the victory, creating a public park with exercise equipment and trees, popular with local students and families.
However, in March 2026, O'ralov returned to the Jizzakh regional court, which reviewed the case under 'newly discovered circumstances'—specifically, that O'ralov had since registered his land rights. The court ordered the HOA to return 105.36 square meters to O'ralov and to refrain from obstructing construction. This decision stunned the community, as it ignored previous Supreme Court rulings.
Soibnazarov expressed dismay: 'We are in limbo, but we plan to appeal to the Supreme Court again. I have already prepared letters to the ombudsman and regional prosecutor. The Supreme Court has twice confirmed our right to the land.' Residents argue the regional court's decision violates the principle of binding judicial acts under Article 75 of the Civil Procedure Code.
The Supreme Court's press service defended the regional court's action, stating that a review based on newly discovered facts is permitted under Article 437 of the Civil Procedure Code, even if higher courts have already ruled. They confirmed that O'ralov's subsequent registration of land rights constituted a new circumstance, making the regional court's decision legally valid. The press service added that parties dissatisfied with the ruling have the right to appeal to higher instances.
Source: www.gazeta.uz