Himachal Pradesh Court July 2009 Judgments

Vikram Singh Negi Vs. State of H.P. and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(2)ShimLC362

Deepak Gupta, J.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the provision whereby the children of bona fide Himachalis who , were serving as the employees of other State Governments or Autonomous and Semi Government organizations of such States are permitted to apply for and appear in the Combined Entrance Test for Medical and Dental Colleges.2. In the State of Himachal Pradesh, admission to Medical and Dental Colleges is made on the basis of a combined entrance test. The conditions are laid down in the prospectus. Out of total number of seats, 85% seats are reserved for the State quota and 15% to be filled up on the basis of All India Merit as per directions given by the Apex Court. The eligibility criteria mentioned in the prospectus provides that for the State quota seats, only children of bona fide Himachalis and Himachal Pradesh Government employees and employees of Autonomous Bodies, wholly or partially financed by the Himachal Pradesh Government will be eligible...

Kamaljit Vs. State of H.P.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(2)ShimLC304

Surjit Singh, J.1. Appellant is aggrieved by the judgment, dated 23rd November, 2002, of learned Special Sessions Court, Hamirpur, whereby he has been convicted of offence, under Section 3(x) and (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000, with an order that on realization of the amount of fine, a sum of Rs. 21,000 shall be paid, by way of compensation to the victim of the offence, namely PW-1 Mukhtiari Devi.2. Case of the prosecution, as per evidence on record, may be stated thus. PW-1 Mukhtiari Devi was working as a Teacher in an Anganwari school. The school also used to provide cooked food to pregnant women of the area, besides attending upon the tiny-tots of the area. On 2nd February, 1998, appellant went to the school and enquired as to what had been cooked that day. He was told that Khichdi would be prepared. Appellant thereafter kept roaming...

State of H.P. Vs. Ram Parsad and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Surinder Singh, J.1. The State has challenged the acquittal of the accused-respondents for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Accused Ram Parshad has five brothers. He was living in village 'Tanda' with his brothers Dalip Chand and Pardeep Kumar in the same house but in the different portions. Pradeep Kumar was doing private job at Delhi.3. In brief, the accused-respondents faced the prosecution on the allegations that Pradeep Kumar had performed a love marriage with Meena Kumari of 'Sansi' community. After his marriage both of them lived together at Delhi for about three years. Thereafter Pradeep Kumar Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment?yes. brought her to his village where she lived with her son in the same house in which the accused-respondents were also living. After some time Pradeep Kumar left his job at Delhi and started living in his village with his wife and son. Accused Ram Parshad was...

Dev Raj Bansal Vs. State of H.P. and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(2)ShimLC390

ORDERSh. Dev Raj Bansal, J.E. (Mechanical) working in this department on secondment basis as MVI Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur, H.P. is hereby repatriated to his parent department i.e. HPPWD with the direction to report for duties to the Engineer in Chief, HPPWD, Shimla - 171001. He will stand relieved with immediate effect.-By Order -Director TransportH.P.Shimla -171004.4. The petitioner admittedly was also relieved pursuant to the said order on 5.10.2005.5. He filed the original application before the learned Tribunal on 27th October, 2005 and on the same date interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner, which reads as follows:Sh. B.S.Parmar, learned Additional Advocate General waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No. 1. Reply be filed within six weeks. List thereafter.Issue notice to respondent No. 2 with direction to file the reply within the same period.In the meantime, the respondents are directed to allow the applicant to work at the present place of posting.Dast...

Bbuvnesh Rastogi Vs. State of H.P. and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(2)ShimLC374

R.B. Misra, J.1. In the present petition, the petitioner is aggrieved of the remarks of the Annual Confidential Report of the petitioner for the year 1996-97 to the effect that the petitioner remained absent during the most part of reporting year and the working of the petitioner remained poor during this period. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the remarks appear to vague and are based on surmises and conjectures. The petitioner was never informed/conveyed qua his deficiencies/shortcomings. The remarks have been recorded without adhering to the settled position of law in this regard.2. For the purpose of adjudicating the issues and the grievances of the petitioner, it is necessary to analyses the decisions of the different Court given from time to time.2(a). In the State Bank of India v. Kashinath Kher : AIR 1996 SC 1328, para 15, the Supreme Court has observed that the object of writing confidential report is two fold, i.e. to give an opportunity to the officer to rem...

Nanhe Mukhia Vs. State of H.P.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Surjit Singh, J.1. Appellant Nanhe Mukhia has appealed against his conviction and sentence, for offences, under Sections 489-B and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code, awarded by the Sessions Court at Hamirpur. 2. Appellant was tried for the aforesaid offences, on the allegations that on 18th October, 2007, he went to Nadaun Township, in Hamirpur District, and purchased one cassette for Rs. 30/- from PW-1 Mukesh Kumar. He tendered a currency note of Rs. 500/-. Mukesh Kumar asked for exact amount, as he did not have the change of Rs. 500/-. Appellant told him that he did not have currency notes of smaller denomination. PW-1 Mukesh Kumar then went to one Ravi, who is running Chemist's shop nearby, to get the currency note of Rs. 500/- changed into notes of smaller denomination. Said Ravi, on seeing the note, said that the same was not genuine. The currency note was then taken to a nearby Bank and shown to an official of the Bank, who confirmed that the same was not genuine. 3. Police was info...

Dr. Shikha Sood Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

1. Respondent No. 4 had issued an advertisement bearing No. III/2009 dated 14.3.2009 whereby applications were invited for various posts in different Departments of Himachal Pradesh on the proforma by 12.4.2009. The petitioner submitted application to respondent No. 4 for considering her candidature for the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Radiology in Indira Gandhi Medical College, Shimla. Her candidature has been cancelled by respondent No. 4 on 25.6.2009 on the ground that she was not possessing essential qualification No. (iii) for the post in question. 2. Ms. Vandana Kuthiala has strenuously argued that the action of the respondents of cancelling the candidature of the petitioner is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. She then contended that the eligibility of the petitioner for the post in question was to be seen at the time of interview. 3. Mr. R.K. Bawa, learned Advocate General and Mr. D.K. Khanna, Advocate have argued that the petitio...

Smt. Seema Devi and ors. Vs. Sh. Ajay Thakur and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Sanjay Karol, J.1. The claimants have filed the present appeal seeking further enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I), Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P. in MACT Petition No. 79-K/II/2002, titled as Smt. Seema Devi and Ors. v. Sh. Ajay Thakur and Ors. dated 4.11.2004. 2. The claimants, being the successors-in-interest of Shri Parveen Kumar filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) claiming compensation of a sum of Rs. 20 lacs on account of the death of Sh. Parveen Kumar who died in a motor accident on 7.11.2002. Sh. Parveen Kumar was travelling on a scooter and was hit by a vehicle No. HP-48-4003 being driven by Sh. Sudershan Kumar, respondent No. 2 herein. The vehicle allegedly was driven by Sh. Sudershan Kumar in a rash and negligent manner, which was the cause of the accident in which the deceased sustained injuries and died on the spot due to same. At the time of the accident the deceas...

Kuldeep Singh Vs. Smt. Chand Rani

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2010HP14,2009(2)ShimLC368

V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, against the judgment passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Kangra at Dharamshala, dated 5.6.2007, dismissing the petition filed by the appellant under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for grant of decree of divorce in favour of the appellant/petitioner. 2. Brief facts of the case are that a petition under Section 13 of the Act was filed by the petitioner for grant of decree of divorce. The petitioner alleged that their marriage was performed on 29.11.1983. The parties lived together as husband and wife and a female child was born on 17.11.1984. The petitioner sought the decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. The facts alleged to substantiate the ground of cruelty were that the respondent started showing disrespect towards the parents of the petitioner and other relatives that the petitioner ...

State of H.P. Vs. Tilak Raj and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Surinder Singh, J. 1. Heard and gone through the record. 2. The respondents were tried and acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and in addition, Tilak Raj respondent was also charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act. 3. In short the respondents were put on trial on allegations that on 8.2.1993 after return of Barat in village 'Rajot', marriage celebrations of the son of Shri Sher Singh were going on. Around 9.30 p.m. Yudhbir Singh (injured) was frying 'chapattis' on the hearth. The music was being played by the band party. Respondent Baldev Singh suddenly appeared there and picked-up a quarrel with the band party. On this, PW Yudhbir Singh intervened whereupon Baldev Singh picked-up a wooden stick from nearby, gave its blow on the right arm of Yudhbir Singh and ran away. Simultaneously Tilak Raj his brother an officer of Delhi Police came there, gave a push to Yudhbir...