Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup: December 25 - December 31, 2023

UT of J&K Vs X 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 326

Feroz Ahmed Sheikh Vs Union Territory of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 327

Union of India Vs Jagjeet Kour 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 328

University of Kashmir through Registrar V/s Prof. Gh. Nabi Sidiqi and Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 329

Ghulam Qadir Bhat and another V/s U.T of J&K and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 330

Judgments/Orders:

S. 22 POCSO Act| Child Can't Be Prosecuted For Perjury For False Allegations Of Rape: J&K High Court

Case Title: UT of J&K Vs X

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 326

Emphasising the protection of minors in cases involving false allegations of rape the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that a minor cannot be prosecuted for perjury for making false allegations of rape.

Citing Section 22 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) Act, protecting children from punishment for false information Justice Rajesh Oswal observed,

“A perusal of the Section 22(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act would reveal that if a false complaint has been made or false information has been provided by a child, no punishment shall be imposed upon such child”.

Contractual Employees Can't Be Terminated Without A Fair Hearing When Dismissal Order Is Stigmatic: J&K High Court

Case Title: Feroz Ahmed Sheikh Vs Union Territory of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 327

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that even contractual appointments cannot be terminated without affording an opportunity for a hearing if the termination is based on allegations of misconduct that cast a stigma on the employee.

Addressing the disengagement of employees from the J&K Handicrafts Corporation Justice M A Chowdhary observed,

“If an order is founded on allegations, the order is stigmatic and punitive and services of an employee cannot be dispensed with without affording him an opportunity of defending the accusations/allegations made against him in a full-fledged inquiry”.

'Sufficient Cause' In Limitation Act Can't Be Liberally Construed For Govt Departments : J&K High Court

Case Title: Union of India Vs Jagjeet Kour.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 328

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the expression "sufficient cause" in Section 5 of the Limitation Act cannot be liberally construed just because a government department is seeking condonation of delay.

The court emphasized that government departments are equally bound by the law of limitation and must provide cogent and plausible explanations for delays.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani made these observations while dismissing an application seeking condonation of a 65-day delay in filing a review petition by the Union of India.

Appeals, Second Appeals & Suits Connected By An Intrinsic Unity, To Be Regarded As One Legal Proceeding: J&K High Court

Case Title: University of Kashmir through Registrar V/s Prof. Gh. Nabi Sidiqi and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 329

Underscoring the interrelated nature of legal remedies, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that appeals are not separate proceedings but rather continuations of the original suits.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani, delivering the judgment, emphasized that appeals, second appeals, and suits are interconnected steps in a unified legal pursuit of justice. Hence an appellate Court possesses the same powers and discharges the same duties as that of the original Court, entitling the appellate Court to review the evidence as a whole subject to statutory limitations, if any, and to come to its own conclusions, he added.

No Binding Contract in Tender Participation, Process Cancellable Before Acceptance Letter Is Issued: J&K High Court

Case Title: Ghulam Qadir Bhat and another V/s U.T of J&K and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 330

Upholding the cancellation of a controversial sheep/goat procurement tender by the Sheep Husbandry Department, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that merely by participating in the tender, no right is created in favour of the bidder and the tenderer cannot be precluded from its option to cancel the tendering process on any grounds.

A bench of Justice Sindhu Sharma has further clarified that the tendering process, thus, can be cancelled at any stage before finalisation and issuance of a letter of acceptance as there was no concluded contract between the parties.