SUBHASH CHANDER MANSOTRA . vs HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF J&K . — C.A. No. 1395/2002
Case under Section XI-B. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010059152000
Filing Date
05-Apr-2000
Registration No
C.A. No. 1395/2002
Diary Number
5915/2000
Order Date
28-Mar-2014
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 02-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SUBHASH CHANDER MANSOTRA .
Adv. PETITIONER-IN-PERSON
Respondent(s)
-
1.HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF J&K .
Adv. RR-EX-PARTE TARA CHANDRA SHARMA (Dead / Retired / Elevated)
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
28-Mar-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
21-Nov-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
20-Nov-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
20-Nov-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Aug-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Jul-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
17-Jul-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Apr-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Apr-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Jan-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Apr-2009
ROPView PDF
-
01-Sep-2008
ROPView PDF
-
06-Jun-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Apr-2008
ROPView PDF
-
04-Dec-2006
ROPView PDF
-
01-Apr-2005
ROPView PDF
-
04-Mar-2005
ROPView PDF
-
09-Aug-2004
ROPView PDF
-
27-Apr-2004
ROPView PDF
-
17-Feb-2004
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Jan-2004
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Dec-2003
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
23-Aug-2002
ROPView PDF
-
22-Apr-2002
ROPView PDF
-
19-Feb-2002
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Dec-2001
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
08-Oct-2001
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Sep-2001
ROPView PDF
-
05-Apr-2000
Case filed
Registration No. C.A. No. 1395/2002
Summary: C.A. No. 1395/2002 (Subhash Chander Mansotra v. High Court of J&K) Outcome: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on March 28, 2014. Appellants challenged the High Court's judgment upholding a 1997 selection process for District and Sessions Judge positions under the Jammu & Kashmir Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1983, raising six contentions regarding constitutional classification, procedural compliance, and reservation policy. The Court found no merit in any challenge and held that appellants had no grievance against selected candidates, rendering the petition a public interest litigation in a service matter—which is impermissible. No costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts