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.

Narendra Kumar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Narendra Kumar vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Aug 03, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1043169

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
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Narendra Kumar

Advocate Shri. R.K.Samaiya

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Advocate Shri. S.K.Karan, Shri. Karan

Excerpt

writ appeal no.828/2012 03.08.2012 shri r.k.samaiya, learned counsel for the appellant. shri vijay pandey, learned deputy advocate general for respondents no.1 and 2. shri s.k.karan, learned counsel for respondent no.4. shri karan, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4, submits that he has not received all the documents filed by the appellant along with the appeal and appellant may be directed to serve them to him, to which shri samaiya submits that he will serve the same during the cours.of the day to respondent no.4. shri karan, learned counsel for respondent no.4, also submits that the order passed under section 85(2) of the madhya pradesh panchayat raj avam gram swaraj adhiniyam, 1993, was confirmed by the collector but this document was not available with him when the matter was heard and decided by the single bench. he submits that he may be allowed an opportunity to file copy of such an order in this appeal. the respondent no.4 may do so. as an interim measure, it is directed that gram panchayat may continue with the process as directed by the single bench but no appointment order shall be issued till next date of hearing. be listed for hearing on 27th august, 2012. certified copy as per rules. (krishn kumar lahoti) (tarun kumar kaushal) judge judge skc

Full Judgment

WRIT APPEAL No.828/2012 03.08.2012 Shri R.K.Samaiya, learned Counsel for the appellant.

Shri Vijay Pandey, learned Deputy Advocate General for respondents No.1 and 2.

Shri S.K.Karan, learned Counsel for respondent No.4.

Shri Karan, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No.4, submits that he has not received all the documents filed by the appellant along with the appeal and appellant may be directed to serve them to him, to which Shri Samaiya submits that he will serve the same during the couRs.of the day to respondent No.4.

Shri Karan, learned Counsel for respondent No.4, also submits that the order passed under Section 85(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993, was confirmed by the Collector but this document was not available with him when the matter was heard and decided by the single Bench.

He submits that he may be allowed an opportunity to file copy of such an order in this appeal.

The respondent No.4 may do so.

As an interim measure, it is directed that Gram Panchayat may continue with the process as directed by the single Bench but no appointment order shall be issued till next date of hearing.

Be listed for hearing on 27th August, 2012.

Certified copy as per rules.

(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Tarun Kumar Kaushal) Judge Judge Skc

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial