S.R. Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

S.R. Sharma vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jan 04, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1040270

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1040270
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Jan 04, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

S.R. Sharma

Advocate Shri. Paritosh Gupta

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

.....counsel for the applicants. shri swapnil ganguly, learned panel lawyer, for the respondents-state on advance copy. the registry has raised an objection that no correction in the cause title of disposed of writ petition is permissible and in fact if any error was there in the order, review petition should have been filed. it is contended that since the order dated 23.11.2012 passed in w.p.no.7248/2012 is not sought to be reviewed on the ground that no error is committed in passing the order, the review petition would not be maintainable. in view of the aforesaid, the objection raised by the registry is overruled. it is contended that by inadvertent mistake, the right age and the place of posting of the applicants/ petitioners have not been mentioned properly in the cause title of the writ petition and, therefore, the order passed by this court in the writ petition is not complied with by the respondents. this court has simply disposed of the writ petition with direction that in case the claim of the petitioners are identical to the claims decided in respect of certain persons by this court, referred to in the order, the same be also considered in the light of the directions issued by this court in the aforesaid cases within a period of three months. it is submitted by learned panel lawyer that in case appropriate representations are made by the m.c.c.no.1459/2012 2 petitioners/applicants giving correct description of the posting of the petitioners/applicants and their age, the same will be looked into by the competent authority of the department and reasonable orders would be passed in terms of the directions issued by this court in the writ petition. considering the aforesaid, this m.c.c.stands disposed of with a direction that the petitioners.applicants will make appropriate representations giving full details in respect of their place of posting etc.in terms of the order dated 23.11.2012 passed in w.p.no.7248/2012 (s) within a period of 15 days from today.....

Full Judgment

M.C.C.No.1459/201”

04. 01.2013 Shri Paritosh Gupta, learned Counsel for the applicants.

Shri Swapnil Ganguly, learned Panel Lawyer, for the respondents-State on advance copy.

The Registry has raised an objection that no correction in the cause title of disposed of writ petition is permissible and in fact if any error was there in the order, review petition should have been filed.

It is contended that since the order dated 23.11.2012 passed in W.P.No.7248/2012 is not sought to be reviewed on the ground that no error is committed in passing the order, the review petition would not be maintainable.

In view of the aforesaid, the objection raised by the Registry is overruled.

It is contended that by inadvertent mistake, the right age and the place of posting of the applicants/ petitioners have not been mentioned properly in the cause title of the writ petition and, therefore, the order passed by this Court in the writ petition is not complied with by the respondents.

This Court has simply disposed of the writ petition with direction that in case the claim of the petitioners are identical to the claims decided in respect of certain persons by this Court, referred to in the order, the same be also considered in the light of the directions issued by this Court in the aforesaid cases within a period of three months.

It is submitted by learned Panel Lawyer that in case appropriate representations are made by the M.C.C.No.1459/2012 2 petitioners/applicants giving correct description of the posting of the petitioners/applicants and their age, the same will be looked into by the competent authority of the department and reasonable orders would be passed in terms of the directions issued by this Court in the writ petition.

Considering the aforesaid, this M.C.C.stands disposed of with a direction that the petitioneRs.applicants will make appropriate representations giving full details in respect of their place of posting etc.in terms of the order dated 23.11.2012 passed in W.P.No.7248/2012 (S) within a period of 15 days from today before the competent authority of the respondents and in case such representations are made, the said authority will look into the claim of the petitioners/applicants in terms of the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition within the period prescribed.

With the aforesaid, the M.C.C.stands disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

(K.K.Trivedi) Judge Skc

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties S.R. Sharma vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Education