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.

Manohar Hedau Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Manohar Hedau vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jul 22, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1043875

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

Manohar Hedau

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

.....settled at dindori but is being uprooted within two months. the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a representation before the respondent authorities on 30.6.2013 which has not been considered. in the circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner approaches the respondent authorities within fifteen days from w.p.no.11911/2013 manohar hedau vs. state of m.p. & ors.2 today alongwith a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within a period of three month thereafter and till decision of his representation, the petitioner shall be permitted to continue at dindori. it is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authorities would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the representation of the petitioner by passing a reasoned order. with the aforesaid direction, the petition, filed by the petitioner, stands disposed of. c.c as per rules. ( r.s.jha ) judge msp.mms/-

Full Judgment

W.P.No.11911/2013 Manohar Hedau vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 22.07.2013 Heard Shri Vipin Yadav, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief.

The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 29.6.2013 by which the earlier order of posting of the petitioner dated 27.4.2013 has been modified and the petitioner's place of posting has been changed from Development Officer, Horticulture, Dindori to the Tikamgarh.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had also executed the previous order dated 27.4.2013 which is being modified within two months which indicates total non-application of mind inasmuch as the petitioner has already got his children admitted and is settled at Dindori but is being uprooted within two months.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a representation before the respondent authorities on 30.6.2013 which has not been considered.

In the circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner approaches the respondent authorities within fifteen days from W.P.No.11911/2013 Manohar Hedau vs. State of M.P. & ORS.2 today alongwith a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within a period of three month thereafter and till decision of his representation, the petitioner shall be permitted to continue at Dindori.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authorities would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the representation of the petitioner by passing a reasoned order.

With the aforesaid direction, the petition, filed by the petitioner, stands disposed of.

C.C as per rules.

( R.S.JHA ) JUDGE msp.mms/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial