- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Law Ministry renames Jammu and Kashmir High Court The notification ends the cumbersome nomenclature and renames the common High Court as High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh The federal Ministry for Law and Justice has brought to an end a long-winding and cumbersome nomenclature for the High Court of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir. The erstwhile estate was...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Law Ministry renames Jammu and Kashmir High Court
The notification ends the cumbersome nomenclature and renames the common High Court as High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh
The federal Ministry for Law and Justice has brought to an end a long-winding and cumbersome nomenclature for the High Court of the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir.
The erstwhile estate was bifurcated into two Union Territories, namely the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and the Union Territory of Ladakh by the Indian authorities in 2019 after the contentious special status granted to the state was revoked by Parliament.
A notification issued by the ministry said that instead of 'Common High Court of UT of Jammu and Kashmir and UT of Ladakh', the High Court would now be known as 'High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh'.
According to the ministry, President Ram Nath Kovind signed the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2021, on 16 July.
"Present nomenclature is found to be rather long-winding and cumbersome. The said nomenclature may be substituted as High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, which besides convenient would also be in consonance with the name pattern followed in other common High Courts," the notification read.
"The Lieutenant Governor of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir vide letter dated October 27, last year, and the Lieutenant Governor of Union Territory of Ladakh vide letter dated October 20, 2020, have conveyed their agreement to the proposed change in the name of the High Court," the notification further states.
The notification added that the Chief Justice of the common High Court for the two Union Territories vice letter dated November 21, 2020, also conveyed her no objection to the proposed name.
There is no clarity yet if the demand for the High Court's bench in Ladakh would also be accepted in the due course given that the distance between Leh (Ladakh) and Srinagar (seat of the High Court) is over 400 km and requires nearly 10 hours of road journey to cover the distance.