Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2008(2)JKJ411
Bashir A. Kirmani, J.1. Way back in December, 1968 petitioner herein instituted a civil suit against respondents their predecessors in interest for partition of moveable and immoveable property comprising of a three storied house 24' x 16' and land measuring 134 kanals and seven marlas situated at Buchwara, Srinagar under of Khewat No. 16 and Khasra No. 104, 151 to 155 158,169, 180, 18, 218, 228, 240, 278,281,303,308,311,272,373,287,452,516 and 520 (old), Khewat No. 14, survey Nos, 104, 591/151,153,593/152, i54,165, 168, 631/169,180,187,238, 240, 272, 278. 281, 634/303, 677/613/387, 678/613/387, 679/613/387, on various grounds mentioned in memo of plaint mainly based on inheritance. While the suit was being tried in this Court on original side with issues framed as far back as in August, 1969 and plaintiff leading her evidence, under interim order of 9.12.1970 while observing that there were chances of amicable settlement this Court deferred the trial and on application of parties appo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : (1997)IIILLJ368J& K
Gupta, J.1. In this batch of petitions referred to the Division Bench by the learned Single Benches from time to time, the following questions are required to be decided by us:-1) Whether Chapter IV of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (Central Act No. 34 of 1948) (hereinafter to be referred as Act) is ultra vires the Constitution of India or not? 2) Whether Regulation 10 B of the Employees' State Insurance (General) Regulations, 1950 (hereinafter to be referred as Regulations) is ultra vires the 1948 Act or the Constitution of India or not? 3) Whether the respondents can insist on contributions being made by the employees or the employers, as required under Section 39 of the Act, without correspondingly providing benefits to the employees? 4) Whether the employees or the employers or both have any option to pay or not to pay the contributions as envisaged under Section 39 of Act? 5) Whether the notices of demand issued from time to time by the respondents calling upon the petit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : AIR1995J& K36
S.C. Mathur, C. J.1. This Full Bench has been constituted to resolve the conflict in views expressed by two Division Benches of this Court on the constitutional validity of categorisation made by the State Government for nominating candidates to be admitted to the Medical courses, M.B.B.S and B.D.S. in various Medical Colleges throughout the country against the seats allocated to the State by the Central Government from the central pool. One Division Bench has held the categorisation to be valid and the other has held it to be invalid. Judgment of the Division Bench upholding the validity was rendered in OWP No. 995/ 1991, Pankaj Gandotra v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, connected with several other petitions of similar nature, decided on 10-8-1992 at Jammu. This Division Bench comprised K. K. Gupta and V. K. Gupta, JJ. Judgment of the Division Bench which negatived the constitutional validity was rendered in OWP No. 2637 of 1991 Qazi Yusra Aslam v. State connected with several writ peti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2005(3)JKJ459
Y.P. Nargotra, J.1. The petitioner Sanjeev Sharma was married to the deceased Romika Sharma D/O Mohinder Kumar Sharma R/O Mohalla Malhotrian Jammu on 10.2.2003. He was working as Engineer with Rainbow Camera E. Pvt. Ltd. Satungal Kathmandu(Nepal). The petitioner and the deceased were staying at Kathmandu. On 14.7.2003 he lodged a report with District Police Office Lalitpur alleging therein that his wife Smt. Romika Sharma has fallen from the roof of the house located in Kathmandu, District Satungal village Development Committee, Ward No. 8 at about 5.30 AM. Due to the fall she sustained severe injuries so he took her to B&B; Hospital in the vehicle of Rainbow E. Pvt. Ltd and while undergoing the medical checkup the doctor declared that she was dead. The police of Kathmandu started investigations into the death of the deceased. In the meanwhile it appears that mother of the deceased reached Kathmandu and suspecting the death of the deceased to be a murder, she also lodged an FIR with Di...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU. WP PIL No. 02 OF 201.AND WP PIL No. 03 OF 20121) Rinkoo Sharma2) Vilakshan Singh & Anr Petitioners Union of India & Ors Respondent !Mr. Dewakar Sharma & Vilakshan Singh Advocates ^Mr. D. C. Raina, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vishal Bharti, Advocate. Mr. K. K. Pangotra, ASGI. Mr. Z. A. Shah, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vipin Gandotra, Advocate Honble Mr. Justice Mohammad Yaqoob Mir-Judge Date:10. 07.2012 : : Per Yaqoob Mir, J 1.The petitioner in WPPIL No. 02/2012 is an advocate, likewise in WPPIL No. 03/2012 petitioners also an advocates and claim to have contributed to various social and environmental causes. In both the petitions, petitioners have projected particular grievances against the de-notification of protected Wildlife Sanctuary named Trikuta Wildlife Sanctuary claiming therein that the authorities have not adhered to various Supreme Court guidelines. In addition, have claimed that the proposed mining is a potential threat to environm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU. WP PIL No. 02 OF 201.AND WP PIL No. 03 OF 201.1)Rinkoo Sharma 2)Vilakshan Singh & Anr Petitioners Union of India & Ors Respondent !Mr. Dewakar Sharma & Vilakshan Singh Advocates ^Mr. D. C. Raina, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vishal Bharti, Advocate. Mr. K. K. Pangotra, ASGI. Mr. Z. A. Shah, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vipin Gandotra, Advocate HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH, J HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD YAQOOB MIR, J Date:10. 07.2012 : : Per Yaqoob Mir, J 1.The petitioner in WPPIL No. 02/2012 is an advocate, likewise in WPPIL No. 03/2012 petitioners also an advocates and claim to have contributed to various social and environmental causes. In both the petitions, petitioners have projected particular grievances against the de-notification of protected Wildlife Sanctuary named Trikuta Wildlife Sanctuary claiming therein that the authorities have not adhered to various Supreme Court guidelines. In addition, have claimed that the proposed mining...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU. OWP No. 746 OF 200.Institute of Dental Sciences Sehora Petitioners University of Jammu and ors. Respondent !Mr. K.S. Johal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Shahla Rafiqi, Advocate ^Mr. Sunil Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Raj Kamal Gupta, Advocate Mr. W.S. Nargal, Advocate Honble Mr. Justice Hasnain Massodi, Judge Date:16. 11.2012 : :1. The Government of India on 22nd September, 2006 on recommendation of Dental Council of India, issued a Letter of Intent to Trikuta Charitable Trust, Jammu for establishment of new Dental College under name and style of Institute of Dental Sciences at Sehora, Jammu, with an annual intake capacity of hundred students in Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) Course subject to the conditions laid down therein. One of the conditions subject to which the Letter of Intent issued was granted, was that admission for Bachelor of Dental Surgery Course in the proposed Dental College would be made only after receipt of formal permissio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU. OWP No. 746 OF 200.Institute of Dental Sciences Sehora Petitioners University of Jammu and ors Respondent !Mr. K.S. Johal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Shahla Rafiqi, Advocate. ^Mr. Sunil Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Raj Kamal Gupta, Advocate Mr. W.S. Nargal, Advocate Honble Mr. Justice Hasnain Massodi, Judge Date:16. 11.2012 : :1. The Government of India on 22nd September, 2006 on recommendation of Dental Council of India, issued a Letter of Intent to Trikuta Charitable Trust, Jammu for establishment of new Dental College under name and style of Institute of Dental Sciences at Sehora, Jammu, with an annual intake capacity of hundred students in Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) Course subject to the conditions laid down therein. One of the conditions subject to which the Letter of Intent issued was granted, was that admission for Bachelor of Dental Surgery Course in the proposed Dental College would be made only after receipt of formal permissio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2002CriLJ2382
ORDERTejinder Singh Doabia, J.1. 'Pen is mighter than sword'. This proverb seems to have been totally misunderstood by the respondent-members of Fourth Estate. One of the respondents' to this petition i.e. respondent No. 2 is a practising advocate and the other is keen to join this profession.2. The Stuart Kings, who claimed to rule by Divine Right, refused to believe that 'the King is under no man but under God and the Law.' When confronted by the Chief Justice of England, Sir Edward Coke, James-I declared 'Then I am to be under the law. It is treason to affirm it.' Do the respondents have the same notion? The members of the Fourth Estate may be under no man, but they are definitely under the 'Law'. In our democratic polity and the Constitution based on the concept of rule of law, which we have adopted and given to ourselves and which serves as an aorta in the anatomy of our democratic set up. 'The Law is Supreme'. Law in its wisdom considers it of greater consequence that the stream ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU OWP No. 1275 OF2014AND OWP No. 1395 OF20141 Atman College of Education &ors 2 Shri Sai Shyam College of Education Petitioners University of Jammu and ors Respondent !Mr. Sunil Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Mohsin Bhat, Advocate ^Mr. W.S.Nargal, Advocate. Honble Mr. Justice Janak Raj Kotwal-Judge Date:04. 12.2014 :JUDGMENT :1. Petitioners are private/non-Government B. Ed. Colleges affiliated with the University of Jammu, respondent No. 1 (for short the University). They have been allowed different intake of students. Faced with the evil of nonattendance of students in the B. Ed. Colleges, the University by virtue of a decision taken in the 6th meeting of its College Development Council (CDC), respondent No. 4, held on 03.07.2014 has devised a formula to reduce the intake seats of these colleges for the session 2014-2015 proportionate to the level of non-attendance noticed in the course of two 2 inspections held during the previous session. Pur...
Tag this Judgment!