Jammu and Kashmir Court January 2001 Judgments

Mohd. Shafi Vs. Commissioner and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

1. The petitioner sustained injuries while on duty. He was allowed compensation under the workmen's Compensation Act. The operative part of the order passed by the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act on 30.12.1986 reads as under ;'In view of the above, an award in terms of schedule IV of the Workmen's Compensation Act is accordingly issued in favour of the applicant and against the non-applicant for an amount of Rs.15,200/- only including costs assessed at Rs.80/- The non-applicant is directed to arrange for the deposit of Rs.15,200/-(Rupees Fifteen thousand and two Hundred) as compensation with this court within 30 days from the date of announcement of this award failing which the same shall be recovered by invoking section 31 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.' No order as to penalty and interest is made. File to go to records after due completion.' 2. Payment of this amount was not made within the stipulated period of one month. The petitioner preferred an applic...

Nazir Ahmad Khan Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

1. The appellant alongwith others were tried on charge punishable u/s 457/380 RPC by the city Munsiff Judicial Magistrate Ist. Class, Srinagar. They were alleged to have committed theft by breaking house on 30.8.1974. On their disclosure statements stolen property such as a piece of cloth, Transistor and Jewellry were recovered on 1.9.1974 from their possession. The trial court by its judgment dated 12.2.1976 convicted them u/s 411 RPC. All of them were sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment.2. The appellant accused challenged their conviction by filing appeal before the court of sessions judge, Srinagar who transferred the same to the court of Additionel Sessions Judge, Srinagar. The appellate court dismissed the appeal vide judgment dated 8.3.1976 thereby upholding the conviction of the appellants.3. It is strange that even though there is no provision for second criminal appeal either in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in the Letters Patent yet by order dated 23.3.1976 This a...

Sian Dass and ors. Vs. Collector Land Acquisition and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

1. It is not in dispute that proceedings were initiated under the Land Acquisition Act ( hereinafter referred to as the Act). Notification was issued under section 4 of the Act on 23 of March 1998. Further notifications were also issued under sections 6 and 7 of the aforementioned Act. Later on the department for whose benefit acquition was being made vide communication dated 10.7.99 informed the Assistant Comissioner Collecter Land Acquisition Rajouri that the land is not required. This is apparant from the stand taken by the respondents, in para 'C' of the objections. This para is being reproduced below :'That after the award was issued the indenting department vide communication dated 10.7.99 informing the Assistant Commissioner Collecter Land Acquisition Rajouri that the land acquired is not required for establishment of AO,SAO/CO office SSB Rajouri due to certain administrative and financial reasons. The copy of the communication is enclosed herewith and marked as annexure R/1.'2....

Rasool and ors. Vs. Haji Usman and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

1. Sub Judge (CJM) Kargil vide his order of May 15, 1996 allowed amendment of plaint in civil suit titled Mohammad and Ors v. Rustum and others No.13 of 1986 on the file of Sub-Judge (CJM's) court Kargil, so as to correctly describe the alleged source water flow to Plaintiff's land from spring Yakus instead of spring Dasus and further to mention survey Nos. of such land irrigated from flowing water of Yakus spring, besides describing on spot lands of defendants being allegedly irrigated by flowing water of Nala Khurboo(as shown in Bundaubaste Vasil Apashie.)2. Respondents' counsel failed to appear on the last date on 13.12.2000 when the counsel for the petitioner was heard. The impugned order is under challenge, as given in the revision memo and canvased by the counsel on the grounds that by allowing the application and the proposed amendment, nature of suit and cause of action therefor is changed. The rights of defendants to use water from Yakus Cheshma is taken away. It is not the ca...

Parmodh Kumar Vs. Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission and anr.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

1. Fact which are not in dispute in this case may be briefly stated.2. Petitioner applied in response to Notification No. 17-PSC of 1997 dated 1.9.1977, for the post of Horticulture Development Officer. He holds Bachelors Degree in Agriculture as also Master's Degree in Agriculture Chemistry.3. J&K; Public Service Commision decided to hold screening test as such petitioner was called for the said purpose. Such test was held on 30.4.2000. He secured 43 marks. According to petitioner, last candidate in Social Caste Category obtained 42 marks. Thus according to him, he was entitled to be included in the list on the basis of performance.4. It is further not in dispute that vide Government of Jammu & Kashmir General Adminstration Department Notification Srinagar, the 10th June,1999, No. GAD(MTG) Sts/6/93 in Annexure to the Jammu & Kashmir Reservation Rules, 1994, after serial No.21, following were ordered to be added:' 22. Lohars. 23. Tarkhans' 5. Petitioners belongs to 'Tarkhan' caste. It ...

Ali Mohd. Khanday Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

1. Heard.2. Petitioners are brothers in whose favour Tehsildar Pampore (respondent No.2) recorded mutation No. 2463, mutating the property of their father Mohd. Sultan Khanday (Respondent No.3) in their favour. This mutation (Annexure-A) was subsequently challenged by their father/respondent No.3 in revision before Financial Commissioner (respondent No.1). The financial Commissioner vide his order dated 3.10.2000 has set-aside the mutation, No. 2463 date 15.8.98 recorded by Tehsildar Pampore in favour of the petitioners. This order of Financial Commissioner is impugned in the petition on the ground that the order has been passed against provisions of Land Revenue Act and Rules thereunder in so far as the Financial Commissioner has admitted the revision application questioning the mutation in question beyond period of limitation and also contravened provisions of Mohammadan Law. He has not conducted any enquiry. 3. Admittedly the mutation effected by Tehsildar in respect of property of ...

M.L. Darbari Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

1. The Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services Regulations, 1956 define the conditions under which salaries, leave pension etc are earned by the members holding civil posts under the State Government. These regulations also incidently prescribe the compulsory age of retirement. Article 226(1) of these regulations provides that every person holding a civil post under the Government shall retire compulsorily on his attaining the age of 58 years. However, Article 226(2) is an exception to the above rule in terms of which the Government may if it is of the opinion that it is in the public interest to do so require any government servant other than the one working on the post which is included in schedule-II of these rules to retire at any time after he has completed 22 years /44 completed six monthly period of qualifying service or on attaining 48 years of age after giving him three months notice before the date on which he is required to retire or three months pay and allowances in lieu of such ...

Ghulam Ahmad Bhat and anr. Vs. State of Jandk and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: (2001)IILLJ1575J& K

B.P. Saraf, C.J.1. This is an appeal under clause 12 of the Letters Patent against the order of learned Single Judge dated 24.8.1998 by which the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition of the appellants-casual labourers seeking a direction to the respondents to allow them to continue in service for a period of seven years to enable them to get their services regularised in terms of SRO 64 of 1994. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition at the admission stage itself as he was satisfied that the petitioners were not entitled to the relief sought for. The learned Single Judge, however, made it clear that the order of rejection of the writ petition would not deprive the petitioners of their continuation on need basis. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petition in limine, the appellants have filed this Letters Patent Appeal.2. The material facts of the case are as follows. Appellant No.1, Ghulam Ahmad Bhat, was engaged as casual labourer on the muster role by th...