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.

Sushma Uikey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Sushma Uikey vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Dec 05, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1047424

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

Sushma Uikey

Advocate Shri. Sushil Mishra

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

1 w.p.no.20313/2012 sushma uikey versus state of m.p.& ors.05.12.2012 heard shri sushil mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission. the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the present petition seeking a direction to the collector, mandla to decide the representation filed by him on 27.9.2012 praying for implementation of the order passed by the collector himself on 28.8.2012. shri s.m.lal, the learned govt. advocate, submits that the representation filed by the petitioner shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. in view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner files a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition before the collector, mandla within fifteen days, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the representation filed by the petitioner expeditiously in accordance with law, preferably within a period of three months thereafter. it is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authority would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into 2 w.p.no.20313/2012 sushma uikey versus state of m.p.& ors.consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the representation 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 mms/-

Full Judgment

1 W.P.No.20313/2012 Sushma Uikey versus State of M.P.& ORS.05.12.2012 Heard Shri Sushil Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the present petition seeking a direction to the Collector, Mandla to decide the representation filed by him on 27.9.2012 praying for implementation of the order passed by the Collector himself on 28.8.2012.

Shri S.M.Lal, the learned Govt.

Advocate, submits that the representation filed by the petitioner shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner files a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition before the Collector, Mandla within fifteen days, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the representation filed by the petitioner expeditiously in accordance with law, preferably within a period of three months thereafter.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authority would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into 2 W.P.No.20313/2012 Sushma Uikey versus State of M.P.& ORS.consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the representation 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 mms/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial