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.

Deepak Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Deepak Singh vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Feb 06, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1044542

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

Deepak Singh

Advocate Shri. A.J.Pawar

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Advocate Shri. T.K.Khadka

Excerpt

writ appeal no.907/2012 6.2.2013 shri r.n.singh, learned senior counsel, with shri a.j.pawar, learned counsel for the appellant. shri sanjay dwivedi, learned government advocate, for respondent nos.1 and 2/state. shri rajendra tiwari, learned senior counsel, with shri t.k.khadka, learned counsel for respondent no.3. heard on admission. this writ appeal is directed against the order dated 30.7.2012 passed by the learned single judge whereby he has dismissed the appellant’s writ petition no.11337/2012. the appellant and respondent no.3 are holding the post of patwari vide order dated 15.7.2012. the appellant was transferred from patwari halka waidhan-51 r.i.circle waidhan, district singrauli to patwari halka tiyra in the same district and in his place respondent no.3 has been posted on transfer. the appellant challenged the order dated 15.7.2012 on the ground that he has been dislodged mainly to adjust respondent no.3, who is son-in-law of local m.l.a.kedar nath shukla. the learned single judge, by the impugned order disagreed with the appellant and dismissed the writ petition. the learned single has given a specific finding that no material was placed to show that appellant has been transferred to accommodate respondent no.3 merely because the latter is son- in-law of local m.l.a.the learned senior counsel for the appellant could not dislodge the said finding in the present appeal. the order dated 30.7.2012 clearly states that the transfers of petitioner and respondent no.3 have been made on administrative grounds. the order of the learned single judge is well founded and unassailable. we find no good ground to interfere with it. the appeal is accordingly dismissed summarily. (s.a.bobde) (ajit singh) chief justice judge tg/-

Full Judgment

Writ Appeal No.907/2012 6.2.2013 Shri R.N.Singh, learned Senior counsel, with Shri A.J.Pawar, learned counsel for the appellant.

Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned Government Advocate, for respondent Nos.1 and 2/State.

Shri Rajendra Tiwari, learned Senior counsel, with Shri T.K.Khadka, learned counsel for respondent no.3.

Heard on admission.

This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 30.7.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby he has dismissed the appellant’s Writ Petition No.11337/2012.

The appellant and respondent no.3 are holding the post of Patwari vide order dated 15.7.2012.

The appellant was transferred from Patwari Halka Waidhan-51 R.I.Circle Waidhan, District Singrauli to Patwari Halka Tiyra in the same district and in his place respondent no.3 has been posted on transfer.

The appellant challenged the order dated 15.7.2012 on the ground that he has been dislodged mainly to adjust respondent no.3, who is son-in-law of local M.L.A.Kedar Nath Shukla.

The learned Single Judge, by the impugned order disagreed with the appellant and dismissed the writ petition.

The learned Single has given a specific finding that no material was placed to show that appellant has been transferred to accommodate respondent no.3 merely because the latter is son- in-law of local M.L.A.The learned Senior counsel for the appellant could not dislodge the said finding in the present appeal.

The order dated 30.7.2012 clearly states that the transfers of petitioner and respondent no.3 have been made on administrative grounds.

The order of the learned Single Judge is well founded and unassailable.

We find no good ground to interfere with it.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed summarily.

(S.A.BOBDE) (AJIT SINGH) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE TG/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial