Jammu and Kashmir Court April 2004 Judgments

Bashir Ahmed Hajam Vs. State

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Syed Bashir-Ud-Din, J.1. By order 75 of 2002 dated 30.9.2002, subject Bashir Ahmed Hajam has been detained U/s 8 of J&K; Public Safety Act, 1978 with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of the State. The order and the detention is under challenge in this petition. Though number of grounds have been taken to challenge the impugned order but Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has confined submissions to following three grounds:- First that the detaining authority has not communicated the basic facts to detenu thereby denied him right to make an effective representation to Govt. against his detention; Second that it has taken State and its police agency over a month to execute the detention order when the detenu was with the respondents under punitive detention in FIR No. 79 of 2002 U/s 7/25 I.A. Act registered at P/s Kerri Baramulla and Third that despite the detenu/accused having been granted bail in FIR No. 79/02 of P/s Kerri Baramulla on 7.9.02, yet...

Abdul Gani Rasti Vs. Public at Large and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR2004J& K122

Syed Bashir-Ud-Din, J.1. In succession file 267 of 96, District Judge Srinagar on 22.05.2000 granted succession certificate to parents , widow and daughter of one Khuda Baksh Rasti. In the certificate proportions/ shares , in which these persons were entitled/ have right to get the certificate under the J&K; Succession Certificate Act , was also shown. Appeal under section 19 of J&K; Succession Certificate Act was filed in the High Court. This Appeal is decided by the High Court on 26.4.2002 in terms confirming the order of Succession Certificate granted by the District Judge to the parties in the ratio as indicated thereto.2. Abdul Gani Rasti father of deceased Khuda Baksh Rasti, has filed this Review Petition in terms seeking review of the judgment/ order of this court in CIMA No. 31/2000, referred herein above , on grounds stated in the Review Application. After hearing the Ld. Counsel for the parties and on perusing the record, no ground for review much less good and cogent ground ...

Abdul Gani Rasti and anr. Vs. Qurat-ul-aIn and anr.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR2004J& K147

Syed Bashir-Ud-Din, J. 1. After the District Judge Srinagar granted Succession Certificate in Succession File No.267/96 on 22.05.2000 to parents, widow and minor daughter of Khuda Baksh Rasti in respect of debts and securities specified and described in the application on the said file. Father and mother of said Khuda Baksh Rasti namely Abdul Gani and Hajra moved an application before the District Judge, Srinagar, the Court of Succession, seeking Succession Certificate to the extent of their share in the ratio of 1/6: 1/6. However, the Ld. District Judge after hearing the counsel for the parties dismissed the application for modification in the Succession Certificate granted by that Court on 22.5.2000 on the ground that the order of the District Judge in granting the original Succession Certificate has been confirmed by the High Court. 2. The second limb of the order under challenge in this Appeal is for dismissal of the prayer seeking extension of the certificate in respect of pay and...

Mukhtar Ahmad Hanroo and ors. Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir Through S ...

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2004CriLJ3451,2004(2)JKJ576

Syed Bashir-Ud-Din, J.1. Petitioners four in number along with an absconding accused are facing trial before Sessions Judge, Pulwama in Sessions case 131/M (FIR No.126/03 registered at Police Station Pulwama). Incriminating allegations against accused are that on Litter-Pulwama main road at Wachi, they Waylaid and robbed two persons Bilal Ganai and Abdullah Ganai, challani witness to the occurrence, of an amount of Rs.1,00,034/-, when the two were riding/ driving a scooter after administering threats and using fake rifle on wrongfully restraining them. Police recovered the amount of Rs.60,000/- from four accused, though the fifth accused Fayaz Ahmad Sheikh is absconding and proceedings under section 512 Cr.P.C are initiated against him .The Police, on conclusion of the investigations has send the accused to face trial. On committal the Sessions Judge has taken cognizance of the matter and the accused are being tried in the court and the case is at prosecution evidence stage.2. Accused ...

Mushtaq Ahmad Dhar and ors. Vs. Dr. Nazir Ahmad Dhar and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2004(2)JKJ377

Syed Bashir-Ud-Din, J.1. Respondent No. 1 has filed a suit against petitioners and other respondents for declaration and injunction in respect of property, business conducted by the business concerns/ firms, land and structures and hotel business of Hotel Pamposh Regal Chowk Srinagar ( referred in detail in paras 3 and 4 of plaint and in amended plaint in paras 3, 3A and 4) on grounds averred in the Plaint .The suit is hotly contested by the Revision Petitioners/ defendants to the Suit. Plaintiff and the two defendants are brothers. The suit is instituted in 1997.The suit was scheduled to be taken for hearing on three preliminary issues, the defendants first filed application for amendment of the written statement followed by two applications, one after another by plaintiff for amendment of the plaint. Under directions of the court, the proposed amended plaint was also filed.2. The trial court of Addl. District Judge Srinagar after hearing the parties allowed the amendment on payment o...

Jammu and Kashmir State Forest Corp. and ors. Vs. Abdul Hamid Thoker a ...

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR2004J& K130,2004(2)JKJ560

Syed Bashir-Ud-Din, J.1. Against Appellants suit for declaration and injunction filed by respondents is pending on the file of Addl. District Judge, Srinagar. As Contractors under State Forest Corporation, the plaintiffs challenged the Management decision and Circulars prohibiting payment of in built charges in respect of works executed after 17.1.2002 and on pleas taken thereto have prayed for declaring the Management decision and the Circulars and other orders on the subject as null and void besides praying for payment in respect of allotted and completed works subject of the suit. Plaintiff-applicants also moved an application for interim relief regarding payments for the works completed after 17.01.2001 which also include additional allotted works in RB1, RB4, RB16, and RB-17. The trial court after inviting objections and after hearing the parties allowed the application on 27.6.2002 in terms as under:-As such application is granted i.e payments shall be made to the applicants for ...

Surinder Kumar Vs. Hotel Corp. of India and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2004(2)JKJ618

Syed Bashir-Ud-Din, J.1. Petitioner, after initial service with Tourism and Hotel Industry, Mercury Travels (India) Ltd. and Hotel Oberoi Palace, at Srinagar, on his applying for the job was appointed as Airport representative in the year 1983 by Central Lake View Hotel Srinagar (hereafter called CLVH) and came to be posted in its Front office where he served for a short period of four months. Thereafter, petitioner was transferred to House keeping Department of the CLVH as Floor Supervisor in December, 1983. Since 1983 petitioner is stagnating as Floor Supervisor in CLVH whereas his juniors Nusrat Afrozi (respondent No. 4) and Ameet Koul (respondent No. 5) who were serving in Front office with petitioner in CLVH have been promoted as Asstt. Lobby Managers in 1986 and 87 respectively. Another person Arshad Shuntoo who too was junior to him was also promoted, though later he left the job. For this promotional post the claim, qualification, merit and seniority of the petitioner was ignor...

Union of India (Uoi) Through G.M. Telecom Vs. V.K. Chopra, Advocate, D ...

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2004(2)JKJ341

Permod Kohli, J.1. Union of India, the writ petitioner in this petition seeks setting aside of orders dated 1-3-1999 passed by the J&K; State Commission (Under Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Jammu passed in Appeal No. 1809/1998 and order dated 9-3-1998 passed by the Divisional Forum (Under J&K; Consumer Protection) Act 1987 on the grounds: --(i) that both the Forums have not appreciated the facts/evidence on record;(ii) That the forums constituted under the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Consumer Protection Act have no jurisdiction to decide the controversy raised in view of specific provision of Section 7B of the Indian Telegraphs Act 1885, which provides a remedy for adjudication of the dispute;(iii) Notice under Section 80 Code of Civil Procedure was mandatory before lodging the complaint before the Divisional Forum and non-service of the notice has vitiated the proceedings.2. Briefly, stated the facts as appear from the record are that respondent No. 1 is an Advocate by profes...

Shah Mohd. Chowdhary Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2004(3)JKJ245

1. This shall dispose of Public Interest Litigation No. 92/2004 and OWP No 1158/2003.2. Vide advertisement dated 31.12.2003, Indian Oil Corporation, advertised 37 LPG outlets. Out of 37 outlets 10 outlets (except one backlog) were for allotment to Scheduled Caste candidates but no reservation whatsoever was made for the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category.3. Likewise, Bharat Petroleum Corporation, vide advertisements dated 16.01.2004 and 22/02/2004, 21 and 17 LPG outlets respectively were advertised for allotment. Out of 38 outlets, 10 outlets in both the notifications were reserved for allotment to Scheduled Caste candidates but no reservation was made for the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category.4. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation too vide advertisement dated 01/02/2004, advertised 47 LPG outlets for allotment. Out of 47 outlets, 13 outlets were kept reserved for Scheduled Caste candidates but no provision was made for Scheduled Tribe candidates.5. Hin...

Haroon Majid Dhobi Vs. State of J. and K. and anr.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2005CriLJ1055

ORDERR.C. Gandhi, J.1. Petitioner seeks to quash the detention order No. DMS/PSA/28, dated 8-7-2003 passed by respondent No. 2, District Magistrate, Srinagar, in exercise of his power under Section 8 of the Public Safety Act (hereinafter 'the Act') directing preventive detention of the detenu, Haroon Majid Dhobi s/o Abdul Majid Dhobi R/o Tankipora near D. C. Office, Srinagar, for a period of 24 months.2. The detention order has been challenged on various grounds including that the grounds of detention have not been communicated to the detenu. The detenu was taken in preventive custody on 13-3-2003 whereas it has been shown in the grounds of detention to have been taken in custody on 20-3-2003 in the grounds of detention. The detenu was released on bail on 26-3-2003 which has not been noticed by the detaining authority while arriving at the subjective satisfaction for directing preventive detention of the detenu.3. Respondents have not filed counter-affidavit despite having granted time...