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.

Santosh Kumar Sofni Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Santosh Kumar Sofni vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Oct 10, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1049234

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

Santosh Kumar Sofni

Advocate Shri. Praveen Dubey

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

w.p.no.17139/2012(s) 10-10-2012 shri praveen dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. the petitioner is working as sub engineer in janpad panchayat tamia, district chhindwara. by the impugned order dated 13-07-2012, the petitioner has been transferred to district dindori. even though various grounds are raised in the writ petition but during the cours.of hearing shri praveen dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's daughter is studying in 2nd year (3rd semester) of b.com.cours.in government girls college, chhindwara and her 3rd semester examinations are to be held in the month of oct. nov.2012 and 4th examination in march 2012 and therefore, a prayer is that the petitioner be permitted to work at his present place of posting till march 2013. the aforesaid grounds raised by the petitioner and the prayer for permitting him to work upto march 2013 is to be considered and decided by the competent authority and this court can only direct the competent authority to take note of the aforesaid grievance of the petitioner and take a decision after evaluating administrative necessity. in view of the above, it is directed that on the petitioner's filing a certified copy of this order alongwith relevant documents before the competent authority, the 2 competent authority is directed to look into the feasibility for permitting the petitioner to work at his present place of posting till the end of march 2013 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order . till the aforesaid exercise is not completed, the petitioner shall be permitted to work at his present place of posting. with the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. (rajendra menon) hsp judge

Full Judgment

W.P.NO.17139/2012(S) 10-10-2012 Shri Praveen Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner is working as Sub Engineer in Janpad Panchayat Tamia, District Chhindwara.

By the impugned order dated 13-07-2012, the petitioner has been transferred to District Dindori.

Even though various grounds are raised in the writ petition but during the couRs.of hearing Shri Praveen Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's daughter is studying in 2nd year (3rd Semester) of B.Com.CouRs.in Government Girls College, Chhindwara and her 3rd Semester examinations are to be held in the month of Oct.

Nov.2012 and 4th examination in March 2012 and therefore, a prayer is that the petitioner be permitted to work at his present place of posting till March 2013.

The aforesaid grounds raised by the petitioner and the prayer for permitting him to work upto March 2013 is to be considered and decided by the competent authority and this court can only direct the competent authority to take note of the aforesaid grievance of the petitioner and take a decision after evaluating administrative necessity.

In view of the above, it is directed that on the petitioner's filing a certified copy of this order alongwith relevant documents before the competent authority, the 2 competent authority is directed to look into the feasibility for permitting the petitioner to work at his present place of posting till the end of March 2013 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order .

Till the aforesaid exercise is not completed, the petitioner shall be permitted to work at his present place of posting.

With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.

(RAJENDRA MENON) hsp JUDGE

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial