Latest news with #NavinChawla
News18
4 hours ago
- News18
Derogatory remarks in complaints to spouse's employer cruelty: Delhi HC
New Delhi, Jul 24 (PTI) The Delhi High Court has said derogatory and defamatory remarks in complaints to the estranged spouse's employer amounts to cruelty and upheld the divorce granted to a man. A bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Renu Bhatnagar in its July 1 verdict said marriage entails mutual respect and adjustment and some parties take less time to adjust with each other while the others take longer time. The order, however, highlighted both parties were expected to show due respect to each other. 'Irrespective of the merits of these complaints, and regardless of whether the allegations made therein were false or true, we find that making such derogatory and defamatory remarks in the form of complaints to the employer of the spouse are nothing but cruelty," the bench said. The order termed 'tolerance, adjustment and mutual respect" to be the foundations of a 'sound and healthy marriage". Dismissing the woman's appeal, the court upheld a family court order of divorce to the husband on the ground of cruelty by the wife. The couple married in 1989 and had two children before separating in 2010-11. The wife moved the high court against the divorce decree and claimed her estranged husband resorted to various illegal measures to forcibly evict her and their children from the matrimonial home. The high court observed the allegations of adultery levelled by the parties against each other. Both the woman and the man accused each other of adultery. The court said the woman's complaints to her husband's employer, particulary about the unfounded allegation of adultery, can't be used to address the issues of any wrong done to her for his employer had no role. The order noted that the woman's complaints were made to harass the husband and humiliate him before his colleagues at workplace. The bench said the family court rightly dissolved the marriage between the parties by upholding the allegations of cruelty based on the man's evidence. 'The fact that the parties have been living separately for a long time period of time, that is, around fifteen years now, without any resumption of marital cohabitation between the parties, can also be considered as an added ground while deciding the divorce petition," the court said. PTI SKV SKV AMK AMK view comments First Published: July 24, 2025, 20:00 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
India Gazette
15-07-2025
- Politics
- India Gazette
Delhi HC seeks clarity from private schools on pay arrears to teachers
New Delhi [India], July 15 (ANI): The Delhi High Court has directed numerous private schools across the national capital to file affidavits detailing the implementation status of the Sixth and Seventh Central Pay Commission (CPC) recommendations for their teaching and non-teaching staff. A Division Bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Renu Bhatnagar issued the directive while hearing a batch of appeals filed by teachers from various private institutions, including DAV Public School, GD Goenka Public School, ASN Sr. Secondary School, St. Margaret Senior Secondary School, and others. The appeals challenge a Single Judge's earlier ruling that, while recognising the teachers' entitlement to revised CPC-scale salaries, had also appointed a committee to examine whether the schools had adequate funds to disburse such salaries, and to assess the eligibility and appointments of the staff. Counsel appearing for the teachers argued that the appointment of such a committee went beyond the scope of the original writ petitions. The teachers had moved court primarily seeking enforcement of salary payments under the Sixth and Seventh CPCs, not a review of their service credentials or school finances. On the other hand, counsels representing the schools submitted that fee hikes have not been permitted by regulatory authorities, leaving them without sufficient funds to fully implement the CPC scales. Some schools claimed to have already adopted the revised pay commissions from various dates and had even cleared partial arrears. To resolve the factual disputes, the Court has now directed each school involved in the appeals to file a single affidavit (not one per case) within four weeks, clearly stating whether they have implemented the Seventh CPC, the date of such implementation (if done), the extent of salary arrears already paid under both the Sixth and Seventh CPC and the amount still pending, if any. The schools are to share copies of their affidavits with the teachers' legal teams. Teachers, in turn, may file responses within two weeks thereafter. The matter is next listed for hearing on September 17, 2025. (ANI)
Hindustan Times
14-07-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Delhi HC delivered 378 judgments on Day 1 after summer break
Despite working at a current strength of 60%, the Delhi high court delivered 378 judgments on July 1, when it reopened after a four-week summer break, according to data accessed by HT. This included 362 judgments on the 'appellate' side and 16 on the 'original' side. The Delhi high court delivered 362 judgments on the 'appellate' side and 16 on the 'original' side. (Representative photo) To be sure, while the high court in 'appellate' side deals with civil and criminal matters, the court in 'original' side deals with commercial matters, including intellectual property rights, arbitration and cases where the suit value exceeds ₹2 crore. On the appellate side, two benches led by court's third senior-most judge Navin Chawla, along with justices Shailender Kaur and Renu Bhatnagar, disposed of 306 civil cases. A bench of justices C Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul resolved 20 cases, also on the civil side. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma single-handedly disposed of 10 criminal cases, and justice Jasmeet Singh delivered six of 16 judgements pronounced by the high court's original side. The judgments not only reduced case backlog, but the detailed judgments also laid down legal principles and guidelines that could serve as precedents in future cases. In one instance, justice Sanjeev Narula in an 82-page verdict on setting aside the sentence review board's (SRB's) decision to reject premature release of Santosh Kumar Singh—serving a life term for the 1996 rape and murder of law student Priyadarshini Mattoo—issued guidelines for the Delhi government to ensure that SRB's decisions align with the objectives of the policy and uphold fairness and justice. In a separate ruling, justice Narula held that fugitives could apply for pre-arrest bail under the Indian law governing extradition. Coming to the aid of an eight-year-old autistic girl, justice Vikas Mahajan reaffirmed that educational institutions were legally obligated to provide inclusive education and accommodate children with special needs under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act. In an 85-page ruling, bench of justices Navin Chawla and Shailender Kaur dismissed 226 petitions filed by Centre against the disability pension awarded to ex-armed forces personnel, ruling that pensions can't be denied merely due to the disability occurring during a 'peace posting,' and stressing the need to recognise hardships of military service. Even as vacation benches continued to hear urgent matters three days a week, other judges continued with their effort to bring down the backlog. In June, bench of chief justice DK Upadhyay and justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed the consortium of National Law Universities declare revised CLAT PG results, after finding two errors in the consortium's answer key. Additionally, a bench of justices Prathiba M Singh and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora specially assembled during vacation to assess the progress of authorities in cleaning a smelly culvert accessed every day by over 3,000 soldiers of Rajputana Rifles to head to their parade ground, and the construction of a foot overbridge to address their ordeal. While the Delhi high court continued its work during the summer break, the Supreme Court, in November 2024, replaced the term 'summer vacation' with 'partial working days', acknowledging that a section of the judiciary remained operational throughout breaks. Even during the current break of the Supreme Court, which commenced from May 23, Chief Justice of India BR Gavai renamed the vacation as 'partially working days' and marked a departure from the practice of senior judges including the CJI, not holding court hearings during summer break, by assembling in the first week along with the four senior-most judges.
Indian Express
09-07-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Delhi HC asks Army to reconsider retired Major General for promotion to Lt Gen rank
The Delhi High Court on July 1 ordered the Indian Army to reconsider a retired Major General, who was denied a promotion due to a reproof given for the loss of classified and operational information from his laptop, for the rank of Lieutenant General. A division bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur has directed that Maj Gen H Dharmarajan, who retired on January 31, 2024, will be reconsidered for the notional promotion to the rank of Lt General. 'In case the Petitioner, who has now retired, is found fit to be promoted to the rank of Lieutenant General, the Respondents are directed to grant him notional promotion and rank, and the consequential benefits that is, re-fixation of his pay for the purpose of pension on the basis of notional seniority albeit without any arrears of wages,' the bench said in the order. The bench has found in its order that the Army Special Selection Board (SSB), which considered the officer for promotion to the rank of Lt General, erred in taking into account the Reproof which was administered to him and that it was not supposed to refer to or be influenced by it. 'The Reproof, not being recordable, was not to be placed before the SSB. The Selection Board should have considered only the material placed before it and not called for the record of Reproof, which was otherwise not to be placed before it as per the policy. The denial of promotion on the ground of Reproof alone, is unjustified and arbitrary,' the bench observed. Maj Gen Dharamarajan was commissioned into the 3 Engineer Regiment on December 20, 1986. He assumed command of the 25 Infantry Division in J&K in December 2018 as the General Officer Commanding (GOC). He was due to be considered for promotion to Lt Gen in June 2020. The officer received a show-cause notice on July 25, 2019, alleging a violation of the Cyber Security Policy and resultant cyber breach from his official laptop, leading to the loss of classified data. The show-cause notice stated that the Major General failed to comply with instructions issued by the Directorate General of Military Operations, and allowed the official laptop installed in his office to continue functioning on the Windows operating system instead of the Bharat Operating System Solutions (BOSS). It further stated that on February 21, 2019, he opened an unsolicited phishing email, 'EoMA Post Republic Day Gallantry Awards 2019,' received on his personal email from a dubious email identity, resulting in malware being installed on his laptop, and leading to the loss of classified and operational information. The Competent Authority, while considering the reply of the General, held him blameworthy for some minor procedural issues, and having dropped all the serious allegations, consequently, counselled him in the form of 'Reproof' in a letter dated September 17, 2019. The HC observed that a Reproof is a warning, which is not to be recorded in the service documents of the concerned Officer. 'We may also note that Reproof and Censure are disciplinary measures, used to address minor misconduct or shortcomings in the service of personnel. They are a way of communicating disapproval or areas of improvement by the Competent Authority to the delinquent officer. The intent of Reproof is clear that it is issued for an action of a mild nature, minor negligence or a bona fide mistake, that no other inquiry seems necessary. Thus, it does not reflect in the Service dossier of an Officer,' the HC said in its order. The HC further stated that from perusal of the original record of the SSB proceedings, it is evident that the petitioner's merit was downgraded primarily as the Board Members proceeded to go behind the cause or reason for which the Reproof was awarded, while considering the overall profile of the petitioner for empanelment to the rank of Lieutenant General. 'Though the Selection Board has a discretion in judging the relative merit of the Officers brought before it for considering them for promotion, at the same time, such discretion is not unguided nor can it be exercised arbitrarily, against the stated policy directives, or whimsically. Unfortunately, present is one such case where the Selection Boards, repeatedly, relying upon Reproof, which it had no business to even know of, non-empanelled the Petitioner, thereby vitiating the selection process,' the bench said. The HC has also stated that its orders will not entitle the petitioner to seek reinstatement in service or actual pay post his retirement. The judgment entitles him only to the rank and consequential refixation of his pension.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
05-07-2025
- Health
- Business Standard
Delhi HC dimisses 200+ defence ministry pleas against disability pension
The Delhi High Court has dismissed over 200 petitions of the Ministry of Defence challenging the Armed Force Tribunal's order holding a number of defence personnel entitled for disability pension for their respective disabilities. Disability pension cannot be denied to defence personnel solely on the ground that the onset of the disability occurred while they were posted at a peace station or by contending that it is a lifestyle disease, it said, while noting that military service is inherently stressful due to a combination of factors. A bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur said that granting disability pension is not an act of generosity but a rightful and just acknowledgement of the sacrifices endured by defence personnel which manifest in the form of disabilities/ disorders suffered during their military service. The purpose of granting disability pension to personnel of the Indian Armed Forces is to provide necessary financial support to those who have sustained a disability or illness during the course of their service due to service conditions, the bench said in its 85-page common judgment passed on July 1. The court said such the pension ensures that a soldier who suffers injury or disability due to service conditions is not left without support and is able to live with financial security and dignity. It is a measure that upholds the States responsibility towards its soldiers, who have served the nation with courage and devotion, it added. The court said it must be kept in mind that armed forces personnel, in defending the nation from external threats, have to perform their duties in most harsh and inhuman weather and conditions, be it in far-flung corners of land, in terrains and atmosphere where the limits of a man's survival are tested, or in air or water, where again surviving each day is a challenge, away from the luxury of family life and comforts. The central government, through the Ministry of Defence, challenged the tribunal's orders on the grounds that the Release Medical Board (RMB) had clearly opined that the medical condition of the defence personnel suffering from hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus Type II was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service. The ministry contended that these personnel were not entitled to disability element of pension. The high court said it was incumbent upon the RMB to furnish cogent and well-reasoned justification for their conclusions that the disease or disability suffered by the personnel cannot be said to be attributable to or aggravated by such service conditions. The court said disability pension cannot be denied to defence personnel solely on the ground that the onset of the disability occurred while they were posted at a peace station. It is disheartening that members of our armed forces are being denied disability pension solely on the aforementioned ground. This overlooks the continuous physical and mental stress faced by soldiers, regardless of their location, the bench said. It said even in peace stations, military service is inherently stressful due to a combination of factors such as strict discipline, long working hours, limited personal freedom, and constant readiness for deployment. The psychological burden of being away from family, living in isolated or challenging environments, and coping with the uncertainty of sudden transfers or duties adds to this strain. Additionally, the toll of continuous combat training further contributes to mental fatigue, it said. Despite the absence of active conflict or the challenges of hard area postings, the demanding nature of military life at peace stations can significantly impact the overall well-being of personnel, the court said, adding that even when not on the front lines or in hard areas, soldiers are aware that the threat is never far away. This environment, where danger is a constant reality for their peers and could become their own at any moment, creates a persistent state of mental and emotional strain that cannot be overlooked. "Thus, military service, whether in peace locations or operational zones, inherently carries stress that may predispose Force personnel to medical conditions such as hypertension, the bench said. The court said lifestyle varies from individual to individual and a mere statement that a disease is a lifestyle disorder cannot be a sufficient reason to deny disability pension, unless the medical board has duly examined and recorded particulars relevant to the individual concerned. When force personnel have rendered prolonged military service, there exists a substantial onus on the RMB to establish that the hypertension is not attributable to or aggravated by military service, it said. The court said the authorities have ignored that many of these soldiers had previously served in the field or hard areas, only to be diagnosed with their respective disabilities later during their peace postings. Denying benefits under such circumstances not only undermines their service but also fails to acknowledge the effect of their demanding careers, it said. The court said the possibility cannot be ruled out that these factors jointly and severally can become a chronic source of mental stress and strain, precipitating various medical conditions such as hypertension. It said the RMB must not resort to a vague and stereotyped approach but should engage in a comprehensive, logical, and rational analysis of the service and medical records of the personnel, and must record well-reasoned findings while discharging the onus placed upon it. The matters pertaining to Diabetes Mellitus Type II in which the RMB has opined that the disease is not attributable to or aggravated by military service, solely based on the fact that the onset was at a peace station, cannot be sustained, the court said. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
