Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.69 seconds)
Documents citing Khursheed Ahmad Chohan vs Union Of Territory Of Jammu And Kashmir on 31 October, 2023

Dr. Sumit Sabarwal Son Of Sh. Vikram ... vs Dr. Om Parkash Gupta Son Of Late Sh. Bihar ... on 18 October, 2024

4 Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 has raised a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the present appeal on the ground that a Letters Patent Appeal does not lie against an order/judgment passed by a Single Judge of this Court in exercise of his criminal jurisdiction. It has been contended that since the learned writ Court has passed the impugned directions while exercising his powers under the Code of Criminal Procedure, as such, no LPA would lie against the said order. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 has contended that the aforesaid position of law has been settled by this Court in numerous judgments, particularly in the cases of Shamshada Akhter vs Aijaz Parvaiz Shah (LPA No. 80/2021, decided on 16.08.2021), Abdul Qayoom Khan and anr vs. State of J&K and others (LPA No. 265/2022, decided on 02.08.2023), Rohit Sharma vs Rukhsana Begum and another (LPA No. 154/2023, decided on 04.10.2023) and Khursheed Ahmad Chohan vs. UT of Jammu and Kashmir and others (LPA No. 204/21023, decided on 19.09.2024).
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - S Dhar - Full Document

Dr. Sumit Sabarwal Son Of Sh. Vikram ... vs Dr. Om Parkash Gupta Son Of Late Sh. Bihar ... on 18 October, 2024

4 Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 has raised a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the present appeal on the ground that a Letters Patent Appeal does not lie against an order/judgment passed by a Single Judge of this Court in exercise of his criminal jurisdiction. It has been contended that since the learned writ Court has passed the impugned directions while exercising his powers under the Code of Criminal Procedure, as such, no LPA would lie against the said order. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 has contended that the aforesaid position of law has been settled by this Court in numerous judgments, particularly in the cases of Shamshada Akhter vs Aijaz Parvaiz Shah (LPA No. 80/2021, decided on 16.08.2021), Abdul Qayoom Khan and anr vs. State of J&K and others (LPA No. 265/2022, decided on 02.08.2023), Rohit Sharma vs Rukhsana Begum and another (LPA No. 154/2023, decided on 04.10.2023) and Khursheed Ahmad Chohan vs. UT of Jammu and Kashmir and others (LPA No. 204/21023, decided on 19.09.2024).
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - S Dhar - Full Document

Dr. Sumit Sabarwal Son Of Sh. Vikram ... vs Dr. Om Parkash Gupta Son Of Late Sh. Bihar ... on 18 October, 2024

4 Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 has raised a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the present appeal on the ground that a Letters Patent Appeal does not lie against an order/judgment passed by a Single Judge of this Court in exercise of his criminal jurisdiction. It has been contended that since the learned writ Court has passed the impugned directions while exercising his powers under the Code of Criminal Procedure, as such, no LPA would lie against the said order. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 has contended that the aforesaid position of law has been settled by this Court in numerous judgments, particularly in the cases of Shamshada Akhter vs Aijaz Parvaiz Shah (LPA No. 80/2021, decided on 16.08.2021), Abdul Qayoom Khan and anr vs. State of J&K and others (LPA No. 265/2022, decided on 02.08.2023), Rohit Sharma vs Rukhsana Begum and another (LPA No. 154/2023, decided on 04.10.2023) and Khursheed Ahmad Chohan vs. UT of Jammu and Kashmir and others (LPA No. 204/21023, decided on 19.09.2024).
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - S Dhar - Full Document

Dr. Sumit Sabarwal Son Of Sh. Vikram ... vs Dr. Om Parkash Gupta Son Of Late Sh. Bihar ... on 18 October, 2024

4 Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 has raised a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the present appeal on the ground that a Letters Patent Appeal does not lie against an order/judgment passed by a Single Judge of this Court in exercise of his criminal jurisdiction. It has been contended that since the learned writ Court has passed the impugned directions while exercising his powers under the Code of Criminal Procedure, as such, no LPA would lie against the said order. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 has contended that the aforesaid position of law has been settled by this Court in numerous judgments, particularly in the cases of Shamshada Akhter vs Aijaz Parvaiz Shah (LPA No. 80/2021, decided on 16.08.2021), Abdul Qayoom Khan and anr vs. State of J&K and others (LPA No. 265/2022, decided on 02.08.2023), Rohit Sharma vs Rukhsana Begum and another (LPA No. 154/2023, decided on 04.10.2023) and Khursheed Ahmad Chohan vs. UT of Jammu and Kashmir and others (LPA No. 204/21023, decided on 19.09.2024).
Jammu & Kashmir High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - S Dhar - Full Document

Bharat Bhushan Sharma vs Home Department on 24 February, 2026

On perusal of the record file pertaining to the Khursheed Ahmad Khan case it reveals that in O.A 195/2024 titled Khursheed Ahmad Khan vs UT, the applicant was HARSHIT YADAV HARSHIT C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal Jammu Bench, OU=Court master, PostalCode=180001, L=jammu, S=JAMMU AND KASHMIR, STREET="Wazarat Road, Opposite Chief Secretary Camp office Jammu Jandk", Phone= f43b1c5544466ac12d1b109be2e84ad03e43d7455ad4f908313774f070d1c28f, SERIALNUMBER= 317ab7a2f4cee67ef40cfd31d9f71e774ed64e83e889590de390c87f3d3efda8, E= YADAV [email protected], CN=HARSHIT YADAV I am the author of this document 2026.02.24 16:05:41+05'30' :: 18 :: O.A. No. 1975/2025 aggrieved of G.O dated 15.02.2024 in terms of which, he was deputed to Ladakh on deputation for a period of two years.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Jammu Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1