Latest news with #AnoopKumarDhand
Time of India
2 days ago
- Health
- Time of India
Submit report on food security by July 30: HC to Centre, Raj
1 2 Jaipur: Taking suo motu cognisance of the poor implementation of National Food Security Act and the Food Safety and Standards Act , a single judge bench of the Rajasthan High Court issued notices to several ministries and state govt officials. The court asked the officers of the central and state govt to submit a report by July 30 and explain what action was taken by them in the matter. Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand said, "The implementation of the National Food Security Act and the Food Safety and Standards Act is very poor. These acts were aimed at providing nutritious and quality food to children and women, among others. The officials also failed to discharge their duties properly." Dhand said, "This unhealthy food is the cause of malnutrition and obesity, which is seriously affecting the mental health and development of children. When the health and welfare of the future generation is at stake, the court cannot close its eyes." The court also underlined the quote of Mahatma Gandhi that says it is difficult to remember even God on an empty stomach. "Junk food and carbonated drinks are affecting the mental and physical development of children. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Trending in in 2025: Local network access control [Click Here] Esseps Learn More Undo Efforts should be made to ensure good health by encouraging children and youth to eat traditional and seasonal food. They should be made aware of the benefits of grandmother's kitchen and home-made food," Dhand said. "It is the responsibility of the govt and FSSAI to meet food standards and stop the sale of junk food in schools and educational institutions," the court said. The court issued notices to the ministry of home affairs, ministry of food, ministry of child development, FSSAI, ministry of education, as well as the chief secretary of the state, additional chief secretary, woman and child development, additional chief secretary food and civil supplies, additional chief secretary, education, and sought a reply. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Doctor's Day 2025 , messages and quotes!
News18
3 days ago
- Politics
- News18
'Judgments Are Not Sand Dunes': Rajasthan HC Upholds Finality Of Court Verdicts
Last Updated: The Single Bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, emphatically observed that judicial verdicts must possess permanence and should not be reopened at will. Reaffirming the principle that judicial verdicts must possess stability and finality, the Rajasthan High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the cancellation of a Physical Training Instructor appointment, holding that re-evaluation results do not retroactively confer eligibility for public posts. The Single Bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, emphatically observed that judicial verdicts must possess permanence and should not be reopened at will. 'Judicial verdicts are not like sand dunes which are subject to the vagaries of wind and weather," the Court stated, reinforcing the principle that concluded court rulings must be treated with finality. Background of the Case The case arose after the petitioner, who had appeared for a qualifying examination on September 19, 2022, failed one paper but later passed it after re-evaluation. The re-evaluated result was declared on November 23, 2022. Meanwhile, the recruitment exam for the Physical Training Instructor post was held on September 25, 2022. Though the petitioner was initially selected, her appointment was later cancelled on the grounds that she did not possess the required qualification on the date of the recruitment examination. The petitioner argued that the re-evaluation result should relate back to the original date of the qualifying exam, thereby rendering her eligible for the post as of September 25, 2022. In support of her claim, she cited several High Court decisions where courts had held that re-evaluation results declaring a candidate as 'pass" would relate back to the original examination date. The Single Judge pointed out that in the judgments cited by the petitioner, the Jenany JR precedent was not brought to the attention of the coordinate benches, and therefore, those rulings could not be relied upon. 'Only view that holds the field is that the re-evaluation result would not relate back to the date of original declaration of result. Hence, one cannot claim himself/ herself as eligible for the advertised post, as he or she had been declared as 'pass' after the last date for submission of their application form," the Court held. Emphasizing the importance of stability in legal pronouncements, the Court stated that in a country governed by the Rule of Law, judgments, especially those of the Supreme Court, cannot be unsettled lightly. 'It is not permissible for the parties to re-open the concluded judgments as the same would not only tantamount to an abuse of the process of law and Court, but would also have a far-reaching adverse effect on the administration of justice," the Court cautioned. Concluding that there was no justification to depart from the binding precedent laid down by the Apex Court under Article 141 of the Constitution, the High Court dismissed the petition, thereby reinforcing the legal position that revised results cannot be treated as having retrospective effect in public recruitment matters. About the Author First Published: July 01, 2025, 12:58 IST
Time of India
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
No demolition can take place without fair hearing: HC
1 2 Jaipur: In a key ruling on a batch of writ petitions, Rajasthan High Court, Monday directed the Municipal Council of Kotputli to strictly follow legal procedures before demolishing properties under its road widening drive. The court emphasised that no demolition can take place without a fair hearing and a reasoned order for each affected party. The petitions, filed by nearly 80 property occupants, alleged that demolitions were carried out based on backdated notices, with the same two individuals repeatedly named as witnesses to supposed refusals of notice acceptance. A bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand directed the formation of a committee within 15 days to review individual objections and decide each matter fairly. The Court also ruled that at least 15 days must pass after such decisions before any demolition or construction begins. The bench also instructed that before removing trees for road development, the Council must document them and then plant ten new trees for every one removed, in nearby public areas. The petitioners claimed they were lawful occupants of the affected properties, holding registered sale deeds, pattas from the erstwhile Riyasat of Khetri, or leases issued by the Council itself. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 境界のないゲームを発見する BuzzDaily Winners ゲームをプレイ Undo They alleged that without any proper notice or hearing, the Municipal Council initiated the demolition process under the pretext of implementing the city's Master Plan. They alleged their properties were demolished in violation of natural justice and despite court orders for status quo. Municipal Council's counsel claimed the Master Plan 2011–2031 was implemented after considering public objections and maintained that land acquired for road widening could not be spared. However, the court ruled that if petitioners hold legitimate titles, they must either be compensated. TNN
The Print
04-05-2025
- General
- The Print
What Rajasthan HC said ordering free education for 11-yr-old rape survivor till age of majority
The Rajasthan HC received three letters from Balika Grah's superintendent between November 2024 and February 2025, requesting school admission for the rape survivor. The Rajasthan HC ruling on 15 April this year referred to a lower court order from last year, emphasising her comprehensive care and support, including shelter, medical assistance, and education, until she reached the age of majority, which, under the Indian Majority Act 1875, is 18. New Delhi: The Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, on a series of requests by the Superintendent of the state government-run Balika Grah in Gandhinagar, has granted a rape survivor free enrolment in Class 3, directing officials to give her full support for her schooling. The survivor reportedly gave birth to a child while residing at the Balika Grah, with the newborn handed over to the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA), after which she said she wanted to continue her education to build a better future. The single bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand stressed the importance of the right to education in India, highlighting its fundamental nature, which should apply to every child, and the challenges in girls' education. The judge said: 'The Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002, inserted Article 21-A in the Constitution of India to provide free and compulsory education of all children in the age group of six to fourteen years as a Fundamental Right in such a manner as the State may, by law, determine.' 'The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009, which represents the consequential legislation envisaged under Article 21-A, means that every child has a right to full-time elementary education of satisfactory and equitable quality in a formal school which satisfies certain essential norms and standards,' it added. The girl was admitted to Balika Grah on 19 January, 2024 under a previous 17 January, 2024 lower court order. The earlier order directed necessary care for her, along with nutritious food, medical attendance, and facilities, including education. The lower court took into account the difficult family circumstances of the petitioner, a young girl, who had no one to care for her. Recognising her vulnerable situation, it deemed it appropriate to admit her to Balika Grah. The order stated she should remain at the facility until she attained the age of majority, that is, 18. For her overall well-being and development, it also instructed the superintendent and staff to look after her, providing her with nutritious food, medical care, or any other assistance she may require. Adding to this, the Rajasthan HC order said, 'Looking to her interest in studies and her wish to undergo studies, this court deems it just and proper to grant permission to the Superintendent, Government Balika Grah, Department of Child Rights, Gandhinagar, Jaipur, to admit the girl in any government school situated nearby the vicinity of Balika Grah and bear expenses of her studies and provide her necessary books and study material to continue her studies till attaining the age of majority.' The Rajasthan HC ordered the facility to ensure that the expenses of her education and materials were covered. It asked the Balika Grah superintendent, police superintendent police (rural), Jaipur district administration, and child protection officer to submit documentary proof of her school admission and annual reports in the first week of July. They should also visit the child regularly to ensure her studies continue without hurdles, the Rajasthan HC said. The ruling reinforced the commitment to ensuring educational access and support for vulnerable children in state care, aligning with constitutional mandates and the broader goal of empowering girls through education. Addressing the gender gap in education, the court said, 'Despite the benefits of girl education, many challenges remain in India. Girls often are expected to prioritise household chores and marriage over education, and many families cannot afford to send their daughters to school.' The judge said that girls are still 'lagging behind boys in enrollment, completion rates, and literacy'. The Indian government and non-governmental bodies, however, are aiming to increase access to education for girls, with some progress over the recent years. 'However, there is still a long way to go to ensure that every girl in India can receive a quality education and realise her full potential,' the Rajasthan HC said. (Edited by Madhurita Goswami) Also Read: SC asks govt to respond to divorced man's plea against Surrogacy Act. How law regulates access in India
NDTV
28-04-2025
- NDTV
"Will Destroy Marriage Sanctity...": Why Court Junked Rape Case Against Man
New Delhi: The Rajasthan High Court quashed a rape case against a man after he married the woman he allegedly assaulted. Charges were dropped after the court said criminal proceedings against the man - now the rape survivor's husband - would 'destroy the sanctity of marriage'. Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, legal news website Live Law said, attributed his decision to the 'peculiarity of the marriage' and, therefore, that his ruling could not be used as precedent to quash rape charges if the complainant and the accused 'reach a compromise'. Justice Dhand also noted two Supreme Court judgement to this effects, in each of which rape charges against the man were dropped after the woman and he were married. "Marriage is considered as a sacred union between two individuals - transcending physical, emotional, and spiritual bonds. According to ancient Hindu laws, marriage and its rituals are performed to pursue ' dharma ' (duty), ' artha ' (possession), and ' kama ' (physical desire)." "... marriage is more than a ritual, which cannot be allowed to be destroyed by continuing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner," the judge declared. Proceeding with these charges, the court said, would 'disturb married life'. The eyebrow-raising judgement came after the woman complained she entered into a physical relationship with the accused based on the latter's promise of marriage. However, after she became pregnant the man reportedly fed her abortion pills and refused further communication. But between the time her complaint was filed and the court heard it, the man and woman were wed, and a petition was then made to quash the rape charges. Meanwhile, earlier this month the Supreme Court said failed romantic relationships need not always mean sexual relations were forced on either party. The observation came as the top court heard a plea by a man to quash rape charges levelled by his former fiancee. The woman's lawyer pointed out the relationship in question was 'arranged' and not 'romantic' in nature, thereby raising the question of 'consent'. The court countered, saying the situation had to be examined from both perspectives, and that it had "no attachment to any one gender". The court eventually decided it would hear the man's plea further.
