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.

Dhanraj Kamde Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Dhanraj Kamde vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Dec 20, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1039721

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
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dhanraj Kamde

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

writ petition no :21614. 2012 dhanraj kamd.versus state of mp and others 20.12.2012. shri kapil patwardhan and shri raghvendra kumar for the petitioner. shri rajesh tiwari, government advocate, for the state on advance notice. petitioner is working as a demonstrator in government polytechnic college, khirsadoh and vide order- annexure p/1 has been transferred to government polytechnic college, jaavara, district ratlam. it is stated that petitioner is a class iii employee, his transfer has been made temporarily and pointing out certain personal difficulties and alleging malafides of respondent no.2 in transferring the petitioner, this writ petition is filed. as far as malafides against respondent no.2 is concerned, it is stated that certain complaints were made against respondent no.2, who is principal and controlling officer of the petitioner and as on such complaint action has been taken against the said employee, it is stated that respondent no.2 is aggrieved and annoyed with the petitioner and he has managed the transfer. having heard learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal of the records, it is seen that the petitioner is transferred by the state government and there is nothing to show the nexus between petitioner’s transfer and the complaint or inquiry conducted against respondent no.2. the grounds of malafide raised are vague and are not established from the material available on record. 2 writ petition no :21614. 2012 dhanraj kamd.versus state of mp and others that apart, the other grounds raised being personal inconveniences of the petitioner, i see no reason to interfere into an administrative order of transfer on such consideration. accordingly, granting liberty to the petitioner to take recours.to the departmental remedies available, this writ petition stands disposed of. certified copy as per rules. (rajendra menon) judge aks/-

Full Judgment

Writ Petition No :

21614. 2012 Dhanraj KaMd.versus State of MP and others 20.12.2012.

Shri Kapil Patwardhan and Shri Raghvendra Kumar for the petitioner.

Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Government Advocate, for the State on advance notice.

Petitioner is working as a Demonstrator in Government Polytechnic College, Khirsadoh and vide order- Annexure P/1 has been transferred to Government Polytechnic College, Jaavara, District Ratlam.

It is stated that petitioner is a Class III employee, his transfer has been made temporarily and pointing out certain personal difficulties and alleging malafides of respondent No.2 in transferring the petitioner, this writ petition is filed.

As far as malafides against respondent No.2 is concerned, it is stated that certain complaints were made against respondent No.2, who is Principal and Controlling Officer of the petitioner and as on such complaint action has been taken against the said employee, it is stated that respondent No.2 is aggrieved and annoyed with the petitioner and he has managed the transfer.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal of the records, it is seen that the petitioner is transferred by the State Government and there is nothing to show the nexus between petitioner’s transfer and the complaint or inquiry conducted against respondent No.2.

The grounds of malafide raised are vague and are not established from the material available on record.

2 Writ Petition No :

21614. 2012 Dhanraj KaMd.versus State of MP and others That apart, the other grounds raised being personal inconveniences of the petitioner, I see no reason to interfere into an administrative order of transfer on such consideration.

Accordingly, granting liberty to the petitioner to take recouRs.to the departmental remedies available, this writ petition stands disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

(RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE Aks/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial