Parnika Sharma

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour killing against her by her parents, evoked a petition under Ar 226/227 for the protection of her life and liberty under Article 21.  Brief Facts of the Case According to the

In the case of Geeta v the State of Punjab, the petitioner evoked a writ petition of habeas corpus as she claimed that her husband was kept in illegal custody and could be framed in some cases. Brief Facts of the Case The petitioner, Geeta reached the court, evoking a

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the Respondents’ act of purportedly not promoting him to the post of Junior Basic Teacher (J.B.T.) against Scheduled Tribe Quota Brief facts of the Case In the

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory injunction against Respondents, which was originally allowed. The Respondents filed a petition against that Original Order for the settlement of the dispute and to conclude the

Excerpt In the case of  Roshan Lal versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others, the Petitioner, Roshan Lal, reached the Court and acclaimed that he was superannuated at 58 while according to the retirement policy the age is 60 years. It was observed that the policy was withdrawn and the

In the case of Bal Mukund Sharma v Divisional Forest Officer and Anr., the Petitioner accused the Respondent of acquiring Petitioner’s ancestral property. The Petitioner alleged that the Respondent then tried to throw him out illegally. However, the Respondent claimed that the Petitioner is holding the land illegally and was

Through the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner challenged his transfer order from one campus of the University to another. The Petitioner claimed that it has been issued with malafide intent. The Court rejected his appeal, deeming it to be self-formulated.  Brief Facts of the Case The Petitioner stated that after

A petition was filed before the Court accusing the Petitioner and the concerned authority of wrongfully procuring a low-income certificate. It was alleged that the certificate was procured to get a job in an Anganwari centre reserved for economically weaker women. The Court’s decision as to whether the authority wrongfully

  Case: Prem Singh versus Narender Nath Attri  Coram: Mr Justice Sandeep Sharma In the case, a petition was filed to challenge an order where the petitioner was preceded against ex parte in the execution proceedings. He prayed to the Court to quash the order claiming it to be biased.

Excerpt A petition was filed in the Court challenging the action of the State in relation to an order passed by the government. The order passed, related to the increase in age of retirement of employees with disabilities working in the state government. The Court rejected the Petition. The High