Nominal Index: Shashi Paul Singh Vs Gurmeet Paul & Anr 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 220 Hafiza Begum & Ors Vs Shams Din Bhat & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 221 Showkat Ahmad Najar & Ors Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 222 Dr SI Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 223Rajesh Gupta Vs Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 224 Dr Kuldeep Chander Sharma...
Nominal Index:
Shashi Paul Singh Vs Gurmeet Paul & Anr 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 220
Hafiza Begum & Ors Vs Shams Din Bhat & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 221
Showkat Ahmad Najar & Ors Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 222
Dr SI Vs UT of J&K & Ors 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 223
Rajesh Gupta Vs Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 224
Dr Kuldeep Chander Sharma & Anr Vs Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 225
Judgements /Orders :
Case Title : Shashi Paul Singh Vs Gurmeet Paul & Anr.
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 220
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated that once a person enters into wedlock and decides to raise a family, he cannot turn around and say that he is not ready to perform his moral and legal obligation flowing out of the wedlock as he is in no mood to earn livelihood.
A bench of Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul relied on Vikram Jamwal v. Geetanjali Rajput and another (2010) 1 JKJ 236 and observed,
"It is for the person to decide to marry or not to marry, but once a person decides to marry, he is duty bound to perform all the duties and discharge all obligations that the society and law expect and require him to discharge".
Case Title : Hafiza Begum & Ors Vs Shams Din Bhat & Ors.
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 221
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reiterated the difference between non-disclosure of cause of action and defective cause of action. It clarified that while the former comes within the scope of Order 7 Rule 11, the latter is to be decided during the trial of the suit.
"The settled principles law laid down by the Apex court for rejection of plaint and also as envisaged under Order VII Rule 11 clause (a) has been that a plaint shall be rejected where it does not disclose a cause of action. No ground like the one defectively pleaded cause of action has been either provided in order VII Rule 11 CPC or else in any of the pronouncements of the Apex court (supra) for rejection of the plaint." the court said.
Case Title : Showkat Ahmad Najar & Ors Vs UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 222
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that the security of work should, as far as possible, be assured to the employee so that he may contribute the maximum efforts for the development.
Justice Moksha Kazmi Khajuria observed,
"Government in particular should not allow workers to remain as temporary employees for an unreasonable long period of time; this kind of exploitation of decades makes a temporary employee suffer to the great extent."
Case Title : Dr SI Vs UT of J&K & Ors.
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 223
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a petition filed by a woman officer of the J&K Administrative Services (JKAS) seeking to quash the enquiry proceedings initiated against her by the Anti Corruption Bureau, Srinagar in pursuance of an anonymous complaint.
"This is not the aim and objective of provisions of Section 482 Cr. P.C. more particularly when petition on hand does not unveil any ground muchless cogent or material one, to indicate that the inherent powers are to be exercised to prevent abuse of process of law and to secure ends of justice", the bench maintained.
Case Title : Rajesh Gupta Vs Union of India
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 224
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High ruled that Court mere registration of an FIR or pendency of investigation by the Investigating Agency is no ground to refuse issue or renewal of passport under the Passport Act 1967.
"There is not even an iota of doubt that registration of FIR and the investigation taken thereupon by the investigating agency cannot be said to be the proceedings pending before a criminal Court in India to attract disqualification laid down in Clause (f) of Sub Section (2) of Section 6 of the Passport Act", the court maintained.
Case Title : Dr Kuldeep Chander Sharma & Anr Vs Union of India
Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 225
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that doctors who possess one of the medical qualifications recognized under the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and have experience of not less than two years in the field of sex selection or pre-natal diagnostic techniques fall within the ambit of term "medical geneticist".
It held that medical geneticists shall not be under an obligation to undergo any training or competency based assessment test and hence they are exempted from the operation of Preconception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prevention of Sex Selection) (Six Months Training) Rules, 2014.