JKL High Court Weekly Roundup: December 12 To December 18, 2022

Nominal Index :Case Title : Laxman Das Vs Union of India & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 242Case Title : Khalid Zahoor Khan Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 243Case Title : Masrat Yousuf Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 244Case Title : Meraj Ud Din Malik Vs UT of J&K 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 245Case Title : Bashir Ahmad Bhat & Ors Vs Syed and Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 246Case Title : Aatif Irshad Kumar Vs UT of J&K 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 247Case Title : Harvinder Pal Singh alias Rambo Vs UT of J&K 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 248Case Title : Javaid Ahmad Sheikh Vs Mohammad Iqbal Thoker 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 249Case Title : Desh Rattan Dubey Vs Board of Cricket Control In India 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 250Case Title : Mafooza Bano Vs State of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 251Case Title : Javid Ahmad Akhoon & Ors Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 252 Judgement/Orders1) [Departmental Action] Enquiry Officer Cannot Return A Finding On Allegation Which Is Not Part Of Chargesheet: JKL High Court ReiteratesCase Title : Laxman Das Vs Union of India & OrsCitation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 242The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has reiterated that an enquiry officer cannot return a finding on the allegation which is not part of the chargesheet.A bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed, "The mandate of the enquiry officer holding disciplinary enquiry is to conduct enquiry into the charges framed against the delinquent and restrict his finding to the charges framed. He cannot return his findings beyond the terms of his reference i.e., beyond the charges to be investigated or enquired into."2) Selection Committee's Recommendation To Enlarge Waitlist Does Not Confer Any Right On Candidates Unless Govt Approves: JKL High CourtCase Title : Khalid Zahoor Khan Vs UT of J&K & Ors Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 243The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that a mere recommendation by the Selection Committee for enlarging the wait list, without there being a decision of the Government in accepting the said recommendation, does not give any right on the concerned candidates to seek enlargement of the waiting list.3) Persons Engaged In Statutory Corporation Under Special Contract Do Not Hold 'Civil Post' Under Article 311: JKL High CourtCase Title : Masrat Yousuf Vs UT of J&K & Ors.Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 244 The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that where a person is engaged in a statutory corporation on the basis of a special contract, Article 311 has no application. The provision relates to dismissal, removal or reduction in rank of persons employed in civil capacities under the Union or a State."The engagement of the petitioner seemingly is an ordinary case of a service contract terminable at any time under the terms provided therein the engagement order. Thus, the case setup by the petitioner and the contention of the counsel for the petitioner urged in this regard in general and the applicability of the provisions of Article 311 of the Constitution in particular therefore, is not entertainable in law", Justice Javed Iqbal Wani held.4) Exchange Of Proprietary Land In Lieu Of Encroached Public Grazing Land Not Permissible Anymore: JKL High Court Clarifies.Case Title : Meraj Ud Din Malik Vs UT of J&KCitation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 245The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently clarified that the exchange of proprietary land in lieu of encroached kahcharai (grazing) land is not permissible anymore.The clarification was issued by a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar while hearing a plea in terms of which the petitioner had sought directions upon the respondents for grant of permission in his favour for exchange of six marlas land Kahcharai land at Kawarhama Baramulla district in lieu of proprietary land of same area in the vicinity.5) J&K Land Acquisition Act | Deputy Commissioner/ District Collector Not Competent To Decide Whether Land Is Needed For Public Purpose: High Court.Case Title : Bashir Ahmad Bhat & Ors Vs Syed and Ors.Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 246 The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the Deputy Commissioner/ District Collector is neither the Government nor the authority competent to record the satisfaction as to whether a particular land is needed for public purpose or not as mandated under Section 6 of J&K Land Acquisition Act, 1990.6) JKL High Court Holds State 'Strictly Liable' To 5-Yr-Old Permanently Disabled Due To Electrocution, Orders 30 Lakh CompensationCase Title : Aatif Irshad Kumar Vs UT of J&KCitation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 247 The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court awarded compensation of Rs 30.2 lakhs to a five-year-old boy disabled for life by 33,000 KV HT line laid by the Power Development Department (PDD). The liability for negligence cast upon the functionaries of the State would lie within the parameters of "strict liability" under law of Torts, the Court reiterated.7) Person Challenging Preventive Detention Order At Pre-Execution Stage Must Show...

JKL High Court Weekly Roundup: December 12 To December 18, 2022

Basit Amin Makhdoomi

Tags