Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: himachal pradesh Page 2 of about 4,413 results (0.261 seconds)

May 10 2013 (HC)

Surender Singh and Another Vs. and State of Himachal Pradesh

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Sanjay Karol, J (Oral) Both the revision petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment, as they arise out of the very same judgment and common questions of fact and law are involved. 2. Assailing the judgment dated 16.12.2005, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chopal, in Criminal Case No.31-III of 2005, titled as State versus Surender Singh and another, as affirmed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, vide judgment dated 18.4.2007, passed in Criminal Appeal No.4-S/10 of 2006, titled as Surinder Singh and another versus State of Himachal Pradesh, accused-petitioners Surender Singh (petitioner in Cr.R No.69/2007) and Joginder Singh (petitioner in Cr.R No.81/2007) have filed the present Revision Petitions under the provisions of Sections 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 16.4.2005, police party comprising of ASI Narinder Singh, HHC Suresh Kumar, Constable Moti Lal and HHG Ranu ...

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 2013 (HC)

Subhash Chand Pathania Vs. State of H.P. and Others

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Dev Darshan Sud, J. 1. The petitioner challenges the order dated 5th May, 1999 (Annexure P-6) whereby 4th and 5th respondents have been promoted to the post of Labour Inspector and order dated 4.2.2008 (Annexure P-8) rejecting the representation of the petitioner. 2. At the outset I note that one of the grounds which has been urged for setting aside the appointment is that the minutes of the Departmental Promotion Committee, which meet and considered the case of the parties for promotion to the post of Labour Inspector, 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? Yes contains alterations in which the name of Raj Kumar respondent No.5 was inserted. It was pleaded, this change was made by respondent No.3, who was the Joint Labour Commissioner at that time and Member of this Departmental Promotion Committee. I called for and examined the record of the Departmental Promotion Committee and found that there interpolations were infact in the names for consider...

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 2013 (HC)

Rajesh Verma Vs. State of H.P. and Others

Court : Himachal Pradesh

R.B. Misra , J. 1. The petitioner has challenged his transfer order dated 7.1.2013 (Annexure P-4), whereby, he has been transferred from the post of Superintendent of Police (Communication and Technical Services), Shimla to Superintendent of Police (LR / Tech), PTC (Police Training College), Daroh, along with 16 other police officers of IPS / HPPS cadre. The petitioner has also prayed that he may be allowed to continue as Superintendent of Police (Communication and Technical Services), Shimla. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. Brief facts, necessary for adjudication of the writ petition, are that the petitioner, possessing degree of B.E. (Electronics), was selected to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Wireless) on 26.10.1999, in reference to open selection conducted by H.P. Public Service Commission (in short called Commission), in the year 1999. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as Additional Superintendent of Police (W...

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 2013 (HC)

Manjeet Kumar and Another Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Another

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment dated 8.12.2008, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, in Sessions Trial No. 20-N/7 of 2007, convicting and sentencing thereby the appellant (in Cr. Appeal No.40/2009), hereinafter referred to as accused No.1, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/- under Section 302 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo further imprisonment for a period of one year; whereas acquitting the respondent (in Cr. Appeal No. 290 of 2009), hereinafter referred to as accused No.2, of the charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 IPC, by giving him benefit of doubt. 2. The occurrence having taken place on 23.7.2007 in broad daylight around 3.30 p.m. in village Sawana, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Sirmaur, has taken away a precious and valuable human life as the victim, Naresh Kumar succumbed to stab injuries he received on vital part of...

Tag this Judgment!

May 02 2013 (HC)

Anil Kumar Vs. State of H.P. and Others

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Oral: A.M. Khanwilkar, C.J. 1. Admit. As short question is involved, taken up for final disposal forthwith by consent. Counsel for the respondents waive notice. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. This appeal takes exception to the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 5th December, 2012 in CWP No. 8407 of 2012-A. The appellant had sought writ of certiorari for quashing advertisement dated 8.9.2012, Annexure P-12, inviting applications for filling in vacant post of Assistant Professor (Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery) by way of direct recruitment on regular basis. Further direction was sought by the appellant against the respondents to fill in vacant post of Assistant Professor in question on regular basis only by way of promotion of Lecturers, on the assertion that post for promotional category. The appellant also sought relief against the respondents to defer the process of selection for appointment to fill in the vacant post of Assistant Professor (Oral and Maxillofacia...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 2013 (HC)

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Mahanand

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Dev Darshan Sud, J. The State has challenged the acquittal of the respondent, who was charged for offences under Section 7 and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). F.I.R. No.4 of 2010 dated 4.3.2010 was registered by the Police Station, State Vigilance Anti Corruption, Solan. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 4.3.2010 complainant PW-3 Sh. Ashok Kumar telephonically informed Inspector PW-15 Sh. Daya Sagar that Patwari of Patwar Circle Shamti accused Mahanand had made a demand for Rs.3,000/- for entering a mutation pertaining to the land of the complainant. The complainant was directed to meet the officials of the Vigilance department at Samlech Bye Pass, Solan. Statement of the complainant under Section 154 Cr. P.C. was recorded. He states that he is a mechanic by profession. His father had land holdings in Shamti and after his death this land fell to his share along with that of his mother and sister. He had asked the Patwari that m...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 2013 (HC)

Anjana Sood Vs. State of H. P. Through Secretary (Education) and Other ...

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Surinder Singh, J. 1. The petitioner is a College Lecturer in Economics. On 25.6.2010, she was transferred to Government College Kotshera (Shimla) and worked there till July, 2012, where after she stands transferred vide order dated 2nd July, 2012 (Annexure P-3) which is under challenge, on the grounds that she was not allowed to complete her normal tenure of three years, whereas it was done only to adjust the private respondent, who pursuant tothe earlier orders on transfer did not join in SCERT Solan, but in turn got adjusted at RGDC, Kotshera in her place. It is also her case that she has been doing Ph.D and was on study leave. She appeared in viva-voce test on 4.7.2012. The petitioner was not relieved but the private respondent joined in RGDC Kotshera against a non-existent post. 2. No interim order was granted. 3. However, on 5.7.2012, this Court sought to clarify in reply by the State respondent why the transfer of the private respondent from Shimla to Solan was cancelled and the...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 2013 (HC)

Nazar Deen Vs. Sadar Deen

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Dev Darshan Sud, J. 1. The plaintiff has challenged the judgment and decree of the two Courts below dismissing his suit praying for a decree of declaration and injunction restraining the defendant from interfering in the suit land. Both the plaintiff and the defendants are brothers. 2. The plaintiff approached the trial Court pleading that Abdul Mazid, Yusuf and Makhbool Ali were three brothers. Yusuf died on 3.8.1999, Abdul Mazid on 11.11.1988 and Makhbool Ali on 12.12.1999. Both Yusuf alias Jussa and Abdul Mazid died issueless. On the date of death of Yusuf, Makhbool Ali was alive. He was a residuary heir and in these circumstances no testamentary disposition could have been made by him without his (Makhbool) consent. (See: Mullas Principles of Mahomedan Law Section 65). It was pleaded that Yusuf was not in a sound disposing mind and his will dated 4.8.1987 executed in favour of the defendant does not bind his interest. His suit was contested on a number of grounds and five issues we...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 04 2013 (HC)

Mahender Kumar Vs. State of H.P. and Others

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Oral: Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. 1. Complaint is that the transfer of the petitioner from Govt. Senior Secondary School, Seri-Banglow (Mandi) to Govt. Senior Secondary School, Bagshar (Mandi), vide office order dated 21.9.2012 (Annexure P-2) impugned in the present petition, well before completion of normal tenure, is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. 2. Admittedly, the petitioner is working as a Lecturer (school cadre) in History. In October, 2010, vide order Annexure P-1, he was transferred and posted as such at the present place of his posting i.e. Govt. Senior Secondary 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? School, Seri-Banglow in District Mandi. He, however, subsequently was transferred and posted vide impugned order dated 21.9.2012, Annexure P-2, to Govt. Senior Secondary School, Bagshar (Mandi) vice 3rd respondent. It is this order which he has challenged before this Court in the present writ petition on the groun...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 2013 (HC)

Mrs. Santosh Sharma and Another Vs. the Icici Bank Ltd. and Others

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Oral: R.B. Misra, ACJ. The petition has been filed mainly for the following prayers: i) That the writ of certiorari may kindly be issued against the respondents, quashing the Annexure P-6. ii) That the writ of mandamus may kindly be issued in favour of the petitioners directing the respondent bank for making the reschedulement of the outstanding loan dues with the petitioner No. 1. iii) That the respondent Bank may be directed to settle the outstanding loan dues of the petitioner No. 1 under one time settlement guide lines framed by the Reserve Bank of India or under the guide lines of the respondent Bank, if framed by it. iv) That the respondent bank may be directed to allow sufficient time to the petitioners so that they may arrange the amount for clearing the outstanding loan dues (after allowing rebate/concession in the interest and by waiving of the penalties) or permission may be allowed to the petitioner No. 2 to sell out some portion of his building to satisfy the outstanding l...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //