Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-15-2014
CWP No.537 of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CM No.2622 of 2014 in/and CWP No.537 of 2014 Date of Decision : 15.7.2014 Pawan Kumar ......Petitioner versus State of Punjab and another .....Respondents ..CORAM : HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK ..Present : Mr.Ashok Sharma Nabhewala, Advocate for the petitioner..RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK, J CM No.2622 of 2014 Applicant seeks to place on record Annexure P-12-B i.e.the seniority list. Application is allowed as prayed for. Document Annexures P-12-B is permitted to be placed on record. C.M.stands disposed of. CWP No.537 of 2014 Feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, petitioner has approached this court by way of instant petition, under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the grievance of the petitioner was not being redressed, he finally approached Sahni Gre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-18-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.6994 of 2003 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 18.07.2014 District Bar Association, Panchkula ..Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE Mr.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present: Mr.Sudhir Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.H.S.Lalli, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana Mr.D.V.Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr.Ajay Nara, Advocate for respondents No.2 & 3/HUDA .SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral).The writ petition has been filed by the District Bar Association, Panchkula, which is an association of lawyeRs.through its elected representatives in pursuance to a resolution duly passed. A challenge is laid to the notification dated 12.1.1999 amending the Haryana Urban Development (Disposal of Land and Buildings) Regulations, 1978 (hereinafter to be referred to as the said Regulations.).In terms of the Regulations originally framed, the undisput...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-11-2014
CWP No.17785 of 2012 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.17785 of 2012 Reserved on:28. 05.2014 Date of decision:11. 07.2014 M/s. IAA Hospital Pvt. Ltd. and another ...Petitioner(s) Versus The Authorized Officer, UCO Bank and others ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA Present: Mr. Manish Jain, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Anupam Gupta, Sr. Advocate, with Ms. Nandini Nanda, Advocate, and Mr. Gautam Pathania, Advocate, for respondent No.1-UCO Bank. Mr. Karan Khehar, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3. Mr. Sudhir Pruthi, Advocate, for respondent No.4.1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?. Yes 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.1. The present judgment shall dispose of 3 writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos. 17785, 14741 and 15248 of 2012 since common questions of facts and law are involved in all the writ petitions. The facts are being taken from CWP No.177...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-16-2014
Satyawan IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT201407.30 16:47 "I attested to the accuracy and integrity of this document" CHANDIGARH High Court Chandigarh CRA-D-770-DB-2002 Date of Decision :16. 07.2014 Sunil Kumar @ Sonu .......... Appellant Versus State of Punjab ...... Respondent ***** CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDIP SINGH Present : Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. S.S. Chatrath, Advocate for the appellant. Ms. Manjari Nehru Kaul, Addl. A.G., Punjab. **** 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.Sunil Kumar @ Sonu has filed this appeal against the judgment and order dated 16.09.2002, passed by the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur, whereby he has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ( in short 'IPC') for committing the murder of Gulzari Lal and sentence...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-04-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.2717 of 2014 Date of Decision : 4.8.2014 Ambika and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER ...Present: Mr.Gopal Singh Nahel, Advocate for the petitioneRs.Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab....MAHESH GROVER.J.The petitioneRs.grievance is that they were appointed as ETT Teachers in the Zila Parishad and are now absorbed in the Education Department even though a grievance has been made that a pick and choose policy has been followed but the issue of seniority has been raised. The petitioners were appointed in the district cadre which prohibited a transfer outside the district except in the case of matrimony necessitating facilitation of getting the married couple posted at one station. In this regard an option was to be exercised by the affected employee and in terms of Annexure P-5, the relevant part of which is extracted herebelow, the seniority was to be p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-06-2014
CRA-S-1196-SB-2003 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-S-1196-SB-2003 Date of Decision:06. 08.2014 Harbhajan Singh ......Appellant Vs. State of Punjab .........Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHAVIR S. CHAUHAN Present: Mr. H.R. Nohria, Advocate, for the appellant. Ms. Shivali, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent-State. ***** MAHAVIR S. CHAUHAN, J.(ORAL) Bhag Singh, along with his father, Mohinder Singh and two sons Harbhajan Singh and Avtar Singh, was tried for the offence punishable under Sections 307/326/324/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-Fast Track Court, Ferozepur (for short 'the trial Court') Bhag Singh died during the pendency of trial. Vide judgment/order dated 21.04.2003, learned trial Court acquitted Avtar Singh as prosecution could not fix his guilt beyond reasonable doubt but Mohinder Singh was convicted under Section 323, IPC, and was released on p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-14-2014
CWP No.8980 of 2014(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.8980 of 2014(O&M) Date of Decision : 14.08.2014 Harjinder Singh and others ......Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present:- Mr.Ashok Sharma Nabhewala, Advocate for the petitioners Ms.Monica Chibber Sharma, DAG, Punjab MAHESH GROVER, J The petitioners impugn public notice (Annexure P-15).Similar notice was challenged before this Court in CWP No.1572 of 2013 where similarly situated persons as the petitioners who were selected pursuant to selection process in the year 2008 put it to question. The said writ petition was disposed of with the following directions:- Directions are issued to the respondents to issue a public notice calling for applications from interested candidates possessing higher qualifications of B.P.E/ B.P.Ed/ D.P.Ed/ M.P.Ed prior to 29.04.2008 within a period of 30 days from the date of such publication of the not...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-27-2014
Crl. Appeal No.D-202-DB of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Appeal No.D-202-DB of 2009 Date of decision: 27.1.2014 Kala and another .....Appellants Versus State of Haryana ....Respondent AND Crl. Appeal No.D-252-DB of 2009 Date of decision: 27.1.2014 Jeet Ram alias Jeeta .....Appellant Versus State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE KULDIP SINGH Present: Mr.Vinod Ghai, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Simrandeep Singh, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.Manuj Nagrath, Addl.AG Haryana. Kuldip Singh, J. By this judgment, we will dispose of two Criminal Appeals Kumari Meenu 2014.02.11 16:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.D-202-DB of 2009 -2- No.D-202-DB of 2009 titled as Kala and another versus State of Haryana and No.D-252-DB of 2009 titled as Jeet Ram alias Jeeta versus State of Haryana. The brief facts of the prosecution are that on 29.8.2005, Ashok ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-03-2014
CWP No.19704 of 2003 (O & M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.19704 of 2003 (O & M) Reserved on: 21.05.2014 Date of decision: 03.07.2014 Rati Ram and others ...Petitioner(s) Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA Present: Mr.Gaurav Singh Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioneRs.Mr.Kshitij Sharma, AAG, Haryana. Mr.Ashish Kapoor, Advocate, for respondents No.6 to 8. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?. 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. The present judgment shall dispose of 3 writ petitions i.e.CWP Nos.19704 of 2003, Rati Ram and others versus State of Haryana and otheRs.CWP No.13621 of 2004, Jaipal Singh and others versus State of Haryana and others and CWP No.19691 of 2005, Nepal Singh and others versus State of Haryana and otheRs.since common questions of facts and law are involved in all the writ petitions. The facts are being taken from CWP Nos.19704 of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-11-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.10112 of 2014 Date of Decision :11.7. 2014 Charanjot Singh ..Petitioner versus State of Punjab and another ..Respondents ..CORAM : HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK ..Present : Mr.Ashok Sharma Nabhewala, Advocate for the petitioner..RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK, J (Oral) Feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, petitioner has approached this court by way of instant petition, under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the grievance of the petitioner was not being redressed, he finally approached the respondent authorities by way of his representation dated 12.02.2014 (Annexure P-7).but the same is also pending decision. He further submits that the petitioner will be satisfied, in case respondent no.1 is directed to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner, within a reasona...
Tag this Judgment!