Court : Jammu and Kashmir
N. Paul Vasanthakumar, C.J. 1. This application is filed by the State Home Department as well as the Director General of Police and the Commandant, seeking to condone delay of 9 years and 152 days in filing the appeal. 2. It is stated in the application seeking condone delay that the learned Single Judge has passed an order in SWP no. 1255/1993 on 16.09.2005 and Hon ble the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) no. 8372-8373/2014 having granted liberty to the State to file Letters Patent Appeal against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 16.09.2005, the appeal is filed with condone delay and the same may be condoned. The learned AAG was permitted to argue the merits of the matter also. 3. The application is opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent by stating that respondent filed SWP no. 1255/1993 challenging the removal order passed on the ground that the respondent had participated in the police agitation due to which he has not reported for duty wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Dhiraj Singh Thakur, J. 1. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 13-6-2003 passed in SWP No. 1077 of 2000 whereby the writ Court has dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner. 2. At this stage, it is necessary to give the material facts in brief in the light of which the present controversy has arisen. 3. The petitioner came to be selected as a Watcher by the Selection Committee in the Department of Forest and consequent thereto, an order of appointment dated 5.8.1997 was passed by the Chief Conservator of Forests, Jammu. Although no period was prescribed in the order of appointment, requiring the appointees to join, yet it is admitted that the petitioner did not join pursuant to his selection and appointment and for the first time came forward to submit his joining report on 20.3.1998. The reason reflected in the writ petition for not joining immediately after the issuance of the letter of appointment is stated to be the il...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
(This judgment delivered at Srinagar Bench) 1. This revision petition is filed by the petitioners, who are the defendants in civil suit No. 4 of 2012 on the file of the learned Munsiff Aishmuqam, wherein the application filed by the petitioners under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking rejection of the plaint has been dismissed. 2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this revision are as follows: The respondents have filed civil suit No. 4 of 2012, seeking declaration, declaring the sale deed dated 15.04.1969 with respect to the suit property, I,e land measuring 27 Kanal and 07 marlas falling under survey nos. 249/250 situated at Hangalpawa, as a benami transaction and defendant no.1 be declared as Benamidar of the plaintiffs and for declaration declaring that plaintiffs are co-owners and co-possessors of the suit property with defendant no.1 along with the assets standing over it and for consequential relief of partition of the suit property between the plaint...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
N. Paul Vasanthakumar, C.J. 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant against the order dated 17.07.2009 of the learned Single Judge made in SWP no. 120/1999 dismissing the writ petition seeking compassionate appointment. 2. The case of the appellant before the learned Single Judge was that he is dependent of late Ghulam Nabi Banday (Road Supervisor) who died in harness on 24.09.1987. The deceased was having a service tenure of 12 years as permanent service on the date of his untimely death. Due to the untimely death of the father of the appellant, the appellant discontinued his studies in the year 1993 after passing 8th standard and the income of the family was less than Rs. 500/- per month as per the certificate issued by Tehsildar Handwara. The appellant applied for compassionate appointment under SRO 194/283 of 1991 and his application was forwarded to respondent no.4. A communication was sent by the 2nd respondent to the first respondent stating that the post of the deceased employ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU SWP No. 160 OF2015Tariq Ahmed Kakroo Petitioners State and another Respondent ! Mr. G. A. Lone, Advocate Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Advocate ^ Mr. Vishal Sharma, AAG Honble Mr. Justice Janak Raj Kotwal, Judge Date:22. 07.2015 :JUDGMENT :1. This is a writ petition, seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing Government Order No. 47-GAD of 2015 dated 15.01.2015, whereby petitioner has been ordered to report back to the J&K State Power Development Corporation (for short, the Corporation) and the Corporation has been directed to take steps for revival of petitioners lien against the post held by him prior to his deputation as OSD in the Chief Ministers Private Office vide Government Order No. 301-GAD of 2009 dated 21.02.2009. Besides, petitioner seeks writ of mandamus for directing respondents to allow the 2 petitioner to serve in the Chief Ministers Secretariat as OSD or to adjust him on some other suitable equivalent post in the General Administration Depa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU C2A No. 23 OF2011Om Parkash Petitioners Thakur Bhan Singh and others Respondent !Mr. K. S. Johal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate ^ Mr. L. K. Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocate Honble Mr. Justice Janak Raj Kotwal, Judge Date:22. 07.2015 :JUDGMENT :1. This is a Civil Second Appeal against judgment and decree dated 31.10.2011 passed by the learned Principal District, Jammu in Civil Appeal No. 01/Appeal/48 Appeal, whereby the judgment and decree dated 10.04.2006 passed by the learned Sub Judge, Batote in file No.06/Civil have been upheld.2. With the consent of learned counsel for both the sides, recorded on 01.04.2015, this appeal is taken up for final disposal. The questions of law taken up for determination and adjudication are: (i) Whether in a suit for eviction based on a notice for termination of tenancy under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act (for short TPA), the plaintiff is required to prove the contents o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU SWP No. 1332 OF2010Dr. Amit Sharma Petitioners State of J&K and others Respondent !Mr. S. K. Shukla, Advocate ^Mr. D. C. Raina, Sr. Adv. with Mr. F. A. Natnoo, Adv. for No. 2 Mr. Z. A. Shah, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Vipin Gandotra, Adv. for No. 3 Honble Mr. Justice Janak Raj Kotwal, Judge Date:09. 07.2015 :JUDGMENT :1. This is a petition seeking writ of certiorari for quashing selection of respondent No. 3 as Research Officer in Public Works Department of the State made by the State Public Service Commission/respondent No. 2 (hereinafter for short the PSC) in terms of select list dated 19.05.2010 and writ of mandamus commanding the PSC to declare the petitioner as having been selected and commanding respondent No. 1 to appoint the petitioner against the said post.2. A brief resume of some undisputed facts is necessary: The post of Research Officer is borne on the cadres of the Jammu and Kashmir Engineering (Gazetted) Service 2 governed by the Jammu and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU LPAOW No. 61 OF2014M/s Rakesh Kumar and Co Petitioners U.O.I and ors Respondent ! Mr. Sunil Sethi, Sr. Advocate withMr. Ravi Abrol, Advocate. ^ Mr. Baldev Singh, Advocate Honble Mr. Justice Muzaffar Hussain Attar, Judge Honble Mr. Justice Janak Raj Kotwal, Judge Date:01. 06.2015 :JUDGMENT : (Muzaffar Hussain Attar) (Oral) A Notice was issued on 23rd May, 2007 whereunder the tenders were invited from eligible tenderers for undertaking construction work of RCC/MCC sub-structure on well/open foundations along with miscellaneous protection works with Contractors own cement and steel for Major Bridge Nos. 98, 99, 118, 120, 125, 128, 133, 141, 152 and 163 between Budhi-Samba and erection of PSCS Slabs 9.15/12.20 Mtr. and steel plate girders of 12.20/18.30 Mtr. Spans and casting of PSC Slabs 12.20 Mtr. PSC Girder 18.30 Mtr. at the approximate cost of Rs. 11.49 Crores. The parties entered into detailed correspondence. On 3rd March, 2008, the appellant/w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU OWP No. 419 OF2014AND OWP No. 525 OF20141. M/s. Pardeep Electricals & Builders Pvt. Ltd. and anr 2. M/s. Pardeep Electricals & Builders Pvt. Ltd. and anr Petitioners Union of India and ors Respondent !Mr.D.C.Raina, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anil Verma, Advocate ^Mrs.Sindhu Sharma, ASGI for R-1,4 to 13. Mr. M.A.Bhat, Advocate for R-2 and 3 Honble Mr. Justice Bansi Lal Bhat-Judge Honble Mr. Justice Janak Raj Kotwal-Judge Date:29. 05.2015 :JUDGMENT :1. OWP No.419/2014 has been filed by petitioner No.1 M/s. Pardeep Electricals and Builders Private Limited through its Managing Director, Pardeep Jain petitioner No.2 for quashing clarification No.1 of 2014 dated 14th January, 2014 issued by Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department of Excise and Taxation, Jammu- respondent No.2 herein on the ground that the same offends the statutory and legal rights of petitioners in so far it provides for charging of service tax on the gross value of the contract items...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU Cr Rev No. 13 OF2011Sumitra Devi Petitioners Rajinder Singh & anr Respondent ! Mr. Sunil Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Mohsin Butt, Advocate. ^ Mr. Vikas Razdan, Advocate vice Mr. Sudershan Sharma, Advocate Honble Mr. Justice Janak Raj Kotwal-Judge Date:29. 05.2015 :JUDGMENT :1. This revision petition is directed against order dated 04.01.2011 whereby learned Sessions Judge, Jammu dismissed respondents complaint under sections 494/109, 405, 406, 379 & 382 RPC in File No. 08/compliant in terms of section 403 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code).2. Heard. I have perused the record.3. I may state, briefly, the facts leading to this revision petition: a) Petitioner-Sumitra Devi is wife of respondent No.1, Rajinder Singh. Respondent No.2, Kamlesh Kumari is said to be the second wife of respondent No.1. In the year 1996, 2 petitioner filed a complaint under section 494 RPC against respondent No.1 alleging inter alia that respondent No...
Tag this Judgment!