Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Arun Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Arun Kumar Singh vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Aug 31, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1039102

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Labour and Industrial

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Labour and Industrial

Key legal issue
Labour and Industrial

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Arun Kumar Singh

Advocate Shri. Ravendra Shukla

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

writ petition no.13586/201”31. 08.2012 shri ravendra shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. shri yogesh dhande, learned deputy govt. advocate, for the respondents-state. the only grievance of the petitioner is that a revenue recovery certificate has been issued by the competent authority for recovery of the claims of the petitioner from the respondent no.2 and the said revenue recovery proceedings are pending consideration before the collector, rewa for a long period. though there is no stay or any other restraint to execute the revenue recovery certificate but a long period has lapsed and still the recovery has not been made. the representation to this effect was made but as nothing was done by the respondent no.3, the writ petition is required to be filed. this court has observed in many of the cases that in case revenue recovery certificate is issued by the competent labour court or other authorities, it is the responsibility of the recovering authority to make the recovery of the amount from the concerned and to pay the same to the claimants. in case it is not done, prescription of such a procedure of making the recovery would be frustrated. in view of the aforesaid, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.3 to make the recovery of the amount of revenue recovery certificate and to pay the same to the petitioner within a writ petition no.13586/2012 2 period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today. with the aforesaid, the writ petition is finally disposed of. certified copy as per rules. (k.k.trivedi) judge skc

Full Judgment

WRIT PETITION No.13586/201”

31. 08.2012 Shri Ravendra Shukla, learned Counsel for the petitioner.

Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned Deputy Govt.

Advocate, for the respondents-State.

The only grievance of the petitioner is that a Revenue Recovery Certificate has been issued by the competent authority for recovery of the claims of the petitioner from the respondent No.2 and the said revenue recovery proceedings are pending consideration before the Collector, Rewa for a long period.

Though there is no stay or any other restraint to execute the Revenue Recovery Certificate but a long period has lapsed and still the recovery has not been made.

The representation to this effect was made but as nothing was done by the respondent No.3, the writ petition is required to be filed.

This Court has observed in many of the cases that in case Revenue Recovery Certificate is issued by the competent Labour Court or other authorities, it is the responsibility of the recovering authority to make the recovery of the amount from the concerned and to pay the same to the claimants.

In case it is not done, prescription of such a procedure of making the recovery would be frustrated.

In view of the aforesaid, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 to make the recovery of the amount of Revenue Recovery Certificate and to pay the same to the petitioner within a WRIT PETITION No.13586/2012 2 period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.

With the aforesaid, the writ petition is finally disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

(K.K.Trivedi) Judge Skc

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial