LiveLaw Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 13 - July 19, 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 280 - 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 288Nominal IndexSurendra Kumar & Ors. v the State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 280Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan v Annu; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 278Rajasthan University of Health Science & Ors. v Tanvi SharmaPeer Mohammad Shah Jilani Dargah Samiti v/s The State Of Rajasthan and batch; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 279Suo Motu v State of RajasthanSuo Motu v State of Rajasthan, and other connected petitionHarshit Solanki v State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 281X v Y; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 282Roshan Lal v Veni Ram & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 283Suo Moto - In Re - In The Matter Of Grievance Of The Girls Staying In Balika Grah v Union of IndiaVikas Modi v State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 284Moola Ram v State of Rajasthan; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 285Rajendra Prasad v State of Rajasthan & Ors.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 286State of Rajasthan v Premlal, and other connected petition; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 287Rajasthan State Electricity Board & Anr. v Varda & Anr.; 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 288Order/Judgments of the WeekMining Leaseholders Must Prevent Illegal Mining In Allotted Areas, Violations May Invite Cancellation Of Leases: Rajasthan High CourtTitle: Surendra Kumar & Ors. v the State of Rajasthan & Ors.Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 280Observing that mining leaseholders bear a responsibility to ensure that illegal mining is not carried out in the areas allotted to them, the Rajasthan High Court has cautioned that leaseholders found indulging in unauthorised extraction may face cancellation of their leases. [2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 279]The division bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Maneesh Sharma further clarified that, in the event of such violations coming to light, the Mining Engineer would be at liberty to cancel the leases of the erring mining operators.Courts Can't Direct Education Board To Alter Date Of Birth In School Records, Student Must First Approach Board: Rajasthan High CourtTitle: Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan v AnnuCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 278The Rajasthan High Court has held that courts cannot direct educational boards to alter the date of birth recorded in school certificates, observing that such requests must first be examined by the concerned Board itself. [2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 278]Setting aside a single judge's order directing the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, to change a student's date of birth in her Class X certificate, the Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Maneesh Sharma clarified that an aggrieved person may approach the civil court if dissatisfied with the Board's decision.Rajasthan High Court Constitutes Committee To Decide If BSc Biochemistry Is Equivalent To Biology With Chemistry And ZoologyTitle: Rajasthan University of Health Science & Ors. v Tanvi SharmaRajasthan High Court has directed the Rajasthan University of Health Science (RUHS) to form an independent Equivalence Committee to decide whether B.Sc. Biochemistry was equivalent to B.Sc. Biology with Chemistry and Zoology.The division bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Maneesh Sharma has asked RUHS to submit a report in this regard within one month.The matter is listed on August 10, 2026.'Issue Of National Security': Rajasthan High Court Rejects Pleas Against Eviction Notices Issued To Mosques, Dargahs At Indo-Pak Border Title: Peer Mohammad Shah Jilani Dargah Samiti v/s The State Of Rajasthan and batchCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 279The Rajasthan High Court has dismissed a batch of petitions challenging show-cause and eviction notices issued to Mosques, Madrasas and Dargahs situated within 50km of the India-Pakistan border, observing that the matter pertained to national security and was not a case of religious discrimination. [2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 279]The court was hearing a batch of pleas by various Madrasas, Mosques, and Dargahs challenging validity of the eviction/vacation/ and show-cause notices issued by the state authorities, qua the petitioners' properties and constructions situated within a radius of approximately 50 km from the Indo–Pakistan border.Justice Sameer Jain referred to Ministry of Home Affairs' notification of 11.10.2021, under Section 139 of the Border Security Force Act, as per which the Central Government enhanced and rationalized the territorial jurisdiction and operational powers of the Border Security Force in border areas, including regions extending up to 50 kilometres from the International Border. "this Court holds that in matters involving national security, strict adherence to the traditional rigours of natural justice is not always warranted, and a pragmatic, situation responsive approach is permissible, provided that there exists material justifying such action. In the present case, sufficient procedural compliance has been made, and no prejudice can be said to have been caused to the petitioners, who themselves have...

LiveLaw Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 13 - July 19, 2026

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Agrawal

LiveLaw Rajasthan High Court Weekly Round-Up: July 13 - July 19, 2026

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers