Delhi Court December 2013 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Mahendra College of Education Vs. National Council for Teacher Educati ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:05. 12.2013 + WP(C) No.1942 of 2013 MAHENDRA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. S.K. Rout, Adv. versus NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGEMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) The petitioner before this Court submitted two applications one on 16.4.2008 and the other on 28/29.7.2008 to the Northern Regional Committee of the respondent-NCTE. The application submitted on 16.4.2008 was for JBT Course whereas the application submitted on 28/29.7.2008 was for B.Ed. Course. Vide order dated 7.6.2011, the Northern Regional Committee of NCTE, rejected the application submitted on 28/29.7.2008, seeking permission to start B.Ed. Course.2. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before NCTE which came to be decided vide order dated 4.11.2011. The NCTE noted the submission of the petitioner that t...
Ranveer Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on September 18, 2013 Judgment Delivered on December 05, 2013 + W.P.(C) 6636/2011 PRADEEP ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Sanjay Ghose and Mohd. Farrubh, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. Represented by: + ..... Respondents Ms.Sweety Manchanda, CGSC with Ms.Shruti Aggarwal and Mr.Kartikey Mahajan, Advocates W.P.(C) 2041/2012 RANVEER SINGH Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Rajender Yadav, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.S.M.Arif, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.1. The aforesaid two writ petitions involve identical issue and with the consent of counsel for the parties, are being disposed of by this common order.2. In the month of February, 2011, an advertisement was issued by the respondent No.2 Staff Selection Commission (SSC) inviting applications for recruitment to the post of Constables (GD) in the C...
Rajesh and anr. Vs. the State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
$-8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :5. h DECEMBER, 2013 + CRL.A. 420/2001 RAJESH & ANR. ..... Appellants Through : Mr.D.S.Rathore, Advocate for A2. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) Through : ..... Respondent Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. The case is taken up today as the date already fixed i.e. 04.12.2013 was declared as holiday on account of General Elections to the Legislative Assembly of Delhi.2. Rajesh, Mahender Kumar and Harish Chand @ Hari were arrested in case FIR No.131/93 PS Keshav Puram and were sent for trial under Section 307/452 IPC with the allegations that on 05.07.1993 at around 07.30 P.M. at G-40/A Industrial Area, Lawrence Road, they in furtherance of common intention inflicted injuries to C.R.P. Rao by a knife. Harish Chand @ Hari was declared Proclaimed Offender. During trial it emerged that the assailants had also robbed ` 5,000/- from the complainant C.R.P. Rao. The appellants ...
Kapil @ Vijay Vs. the State (N.C.T. of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :2. d DECEMBER, 2013 DECIDED ON :5. h DECEMBER, 2013 + CRL.A. 223/2000 KAPIL @ VIJAY Through : ....Appellant Mr.Sahid Ali, Advocate with Mr.Mohd.Shariq, Advocate. versus THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) .Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Kapil @ Vijay (the appellant) challenges the correctness and legality of conviction under Section 364/307 IPC in Sessions Case No.139/98 arising out of FIR No.349/98 PS Timar Pur by a judgment dated 24.03.2000. By an order dated 28.03.2000, he was awarded RI for three years with fine ` 500/- under Section 364 IPC and RI for three years with fine ` 500/- under Section 307 IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.2. Allegations against the appellant were that on 10.08.1997, he kidnapped Rajinder Singh @ Happy aged about 14 years and inflicted injuries to him. On 10.08.1997, the victim went missing and his mother Surinder Kaur lodged...
Tauheed Mohammad Vs. Jamia Millia Islamia and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision:05. 12.2013 WP(C) No.7647 of 2013 & CM No.16306 of 2013 (for Interim Relief) TAUHEED MOHAMMAD Through: ..... Petitioner Counsel for the Petitioner. versus JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. M.A. Siddiqui, Ms. Jaya Goyal & Mr. Rohit, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGEMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) The petitioner before this Court is a student of the respondentJamia Millia Islamia University. The University received complaints that certain posters had been affixed in its campus and certain hand bills were distributed by some students, which sought to create a wedge and rift amongst various religious sections of the student community. Considering such acts to be irresponsible acts, having a deleterious impact of disharmony amongst the various religious groups on the campus, and also noticing that the consequences of such actions could be disastrously fateful, besides being bound to disturb the sta...
Babu Ram Vs. Land and Building Department and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:26. h November, 2013 Pronounced on:5. h December, 2013 + W.P.(C) 1582/2013 BABU RAM Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Puneet Goel, Advocate versus LAND & BUILDING DEPARTMENT & ANR .....Respondents Through Ms. Urvi Kuthiala, Adv. for R-3/DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT G.P. MITTAL, J.1. By virtue of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing reopening of his File No.F.30(10)/28/29/89/L&B/Alt 4425, dated 06.02.1992 for allotment of an alternative plot, which was closed by letter dated 06.02.1992.2. The Petitioner further seeks allotment of alternative plot in lieu of his acquired land. According to the averments made in the writ petition, 1447 Bighas of the Petitioners land situated in the area of Karkardooma was acquired by Notification No.F.15(III)/59-LSC, dated 13.11.1959 for planned development of Delhi. Award No.54/69-70 dated 30.03.1971 was...
Manjeet Kaur and ors. Vs. Daya Singh Alias Suphwas Srichawla and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No.1229 of 2008 & IA Nos. 7556 of 2008, 9896 of 2010 MANJEET KAUR & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor with Ms. Karuna Chatwal, Advocates. versus DAYA SINGH ALIAS SUPHWAS SRICHAWLA & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Samrat Nigam, Advocate for D-2. With CS (OS) No.1231 of 2008 & IA Nos. 7559 of 2008, 9892 of 2010 MANJEET KAUR & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor with Ms. Karuna Chatwal, Advocates. versus DANIEL SRICHAWLA & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Samrat Nigam, Advocate for D-2. With CS (OS) No.1232 of 2008 & IA Nos. 7561 of 2008, 666 of 2009, 4597 of 2009, 9898 of 2010 MANJEET KAUR & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor with Ms. Karuna Chatwal, Advocates. versus SAVITRI SRICHAWLA & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Samrat Nigam, Advocate for D-2. With CS (OS) No.1233 of 2008 & IA Nos. 7562 of 2008, 9910 of 2010 MANJEET KAUR & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor with Ms. Karuna Chatwal...
Kadam Marketing Ltd. and anr. Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DATE OF DECISION: DECEMBER05 2013 + CRL.M.C. 2838/2013 & Crl.M.A.10824/2013 KADAM MARKETING LTD. & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Mohit Mathur, Adv. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. This is a petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C seeking quashing of Crl. Complaint bearing case No.130/2005 titled as DDA vs. Kadam Marketing Ltd. & Anr., pending in the Court of Mr. Naveen Gupta, learned Metropolitan Magistrate.2. I have heard Mr. Mohit Mathur, Advocate for the petitioner, and Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, learned counsel for the respondent/DDA. Trial Court record has also been requisitioned.3. As per the case of the respondent, on 14.01.2003, premises of the petitioner, bearing No.R-868, New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi was inspected by Mr. Anil Kumar, Junior Engineer, DDA and the office was found to be running at ground floor and in violation of...
V.K. Sharma Vs. State Farms Corporation of India Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.856/2001 5th December, 2013 % V.K. SHARMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Pradeep Misra, Advocate with Ms. Daleep Kumar Dhayani, Advocate. Versus STATE FARMS CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. AND ANR. Respondents Through: Mr. C.N. Sreekumar, Advocate with Ms. Resmitha R. Chandran, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner impugns the action of his employer/respondent no.1/State Farms Corporation of India Ltd in passing the order dated 29.1.2001, retiring the petitioner in exercise of powers under Rule FR56 (j) of the Fundamental Rules.2. The provisions of Fundamental Rule FR56 (j) provides that after a particular age if the employer thinks fit, the employee can be retired. Rule FR56j) reads as under:Rule FR56j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this rule, the Appropriate Authority shall, if it is...
Manjeet Kumar Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1592/2013 Date of decision:05. h December, 2013. % MANJEET KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Ms.Rekha Palli, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Amrit Pal Singh, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA GITA MITTAL, J.(Oral) 1. The petitioner in the instant case has prayed for setting aside of the order dated 9th April, 2011 whereby punishment of removal from service was imposed upon the petitioner on the recommendations of the enquiry officer. The petitioner has also impugned the order dated 15th July, 2011 passed by the appellate authority and the order of the revisional authority dated 16th December, 2011 upholding the order of removal from service. The order dated 9th April, 2011 has been passed after holding disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner pursuant to a chargesheet dated 31 st July, 2010 on the following charges: Article 1 That Force No.0...