Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly RoundUp: April 22 - April 28, 2024

Nominal Index:Veena Gurtoo vs Rajesh Kumar Gupta 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 89Nazir Ahmad Pandit and Ors Vs Union Of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 90Vinod Kumar Vs Jammu Municipal Corporation and another 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 91Sumanta Dutta Vs Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 92Shafket Ali and ors Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 93Ali Mohammad Mir and Ors Vs State Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 94Vasundhara Mittra and another Vs Aseem Tiwari 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 95M/s Sarv Shakti Sewak Sanstha, J&K Vs UT of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 96Advocate Ali Mohammad Lone alias Zahid Vs Govt Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 97Judgments/Orders: No Provisions Can Limit Or Effect Court's Inherent Powers U/S 151 CPC To Do Complete Justice: J&K High CourtCase Title: Veena Gurtoo vs Rajesh Kumar GuptaCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 89Reaffirming the mandate of Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasised that courts possess the authority, even under this provision, to exercise the powers delineated in Section 144.J&K High Court Closes Plea Against Alleged Pollution Caused By Kishan Ganga Hydroelectric Project Due To No Evidence Indicating Breach Of Environmental SafeguardsCase Title: Nazir Ahmad Pandit and Ors Vs Union Of IndiaCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 90The Jammu and Kashmir High Court closed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that alleged environmental pollution caused by the construction of the Kishan Ganga Hydroelectric Project (KGHP).In an order passed by Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi the court said,“..in the absence of any specific denial or material indicating a breach of environmental safeguards, we do not deem it necessary to continue with this PIL and accordingly, the same is closed”.Delinquent Employees Entitled To Copy Of Enquiry Report Even In Cases Where Rules Governing Disciplinary Proceedings Are Silent: J&K High CourtCase Title: Vinod Kumar Vs Jammu Municipal Corporation and anotherCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 91Reaffirming the rights of government employees facing disciplinary actions the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that delinquent employees are entitled to a copy of the enquiry report, even in cases where rules governing disciplinary proceedings do not expressly provide for the same.BSF Act | Offence under S. 354 RPC Excluded From Purview Of “Civil Offence”, Cannot Be Tried By Summary Security Force CourtCase Title: Sumanta Dutta Vs Union of IndiaCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 92Nullifying the dismissal of a Border Security Force (BSF) constable, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that an offence under Section 354 RPC cannot be tried by a Summary Security Force Court owing to the fact that the said offence is excluded from the purview of the meaning of Section 46 of “civil offence” under the Scheme of BSF Act.Stalling Whole Recruitment Process Antithetical To Public Interest: J&K High Court Lifts Freeze On Recruitment To 1395 Posts Of Panchayat SecretaryCase Title: Shafket Ali and ors Vs UT of J&KCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 93Prioritising public interest over the petitioner's claims based on a draft proposal yet to be approved the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court vacated the status quo order that stalled the recruitment process for 1395 Panchayat Secretary posts.J&K Agrarian Reforms Act | Land Ownership Entry In Khasra Girdawari Can't Be Unilaterally Changed Or Altered Without Hearing: High CourtCase Title: Ali Mohammad Mir and Ors Vs State Of J&KCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 94The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that land ownership entries in the Khasra Girdawari record cannot be changed without providing a proper hearing to the person named in the record.J&K High Court Distinguishes Between Plaintiff & Defendant's Death During Pendency Of Suit, Says Injunction Right Survives Plaintiff's DeathCase Title: Vasundhara Mittra and another Vs Aseem TiwariCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 95The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has made a crucial distinction between the death of a plaintiff and a defendant in an injunction suit and clarified that the right to injunction survives the death of the plaintiff and can be enforced by their legal heirs. However, in the case of the defendant, the injunction is operative solely against the defendant and upon his death, the question of binding his legal representatives by injunction would not arise, a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar explained. J&K High Court Closes Plea On Allegations Of Religious Interference & Maladministration At Machail Mata ShrineCase Title: M/s Sarv Shakti Sewak Sanstha, J&K Vs UT of J&KCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 96The Jammu and Kashmir High Court brought closure to a case concerning alleged religious interference and financial irregularities at Machail Mata Shrine.Taking note of the statement of the petitioners that they were satisfied with respect to the steps being taken by respondents on the issue the bench closed the plea. J&K High ...

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly RoundUp: April 22 - April 28, 2024

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags