Devidayal Balmik Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Devidayal Balmik vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Aug 01, 2012

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1050561

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1050561
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Aug 01, 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Devidayal Balmik

Advocate Shri. Rakesh Kumar Jain

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

w.p. no. 11847/2012 1.8.2012 shri rakesh kumar jain, learned counsel for the petitioner. order dated 13.7.2012 is being assailed vide this petition; whereby petitioner, patwari, has been transferred from tikamgarh to lidhora, district tikamgarh. challenge is on the ground that petitioner since is suffering from cancer his transfer ought to have been stayed. true it is the document filed by the petitioner does reveal that the petitioner is suffering from the ailment but the same very document reveals that the treatment for said ailment is taken by the petitioner either at bombay or gwalior. it being not the case of the petitioner that treatment being available at baldeogarh, on his transfer he will be deprived of the same. the transfer, as apparent from order dated 13.7.2012 is in administrative exigency and is within district. the petitioner since is within same district will be able to undertake the treatment as he was availing prior to his transfer from tikamgarh to lidhora. there being no good ground to interfere, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed. (sanjay yadav) judge vt/

Full Judgment

W.P. No. 11847/2012 1.8.2012 Shri Rakesh Kumar Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Order dated 13.7.2012 is being assailed vide this petition; whereby petitioner, Patwari, has been transferred from Tikamgarh to Lidhora, district Tikamgarh. Challenge is on the ground that petitioner since is suffering from Cancer his transfer ought to have been stayed.

True it is the document filed by the petitioner does reveal that the petitioner is suffering from the ailment but the same very document reveals that the treatment for said ailment is taken by the petitioner either at Bombay or Gwalior. It being not the case of the petitioner that treatment being available at Baldeogarh, on his transfer he will be deprived of the same.

The transfer, as apparent from order dated 13.7.2012 is in administrative exigency and is within district.

The petitioner since is within same district will be able to undertake the treatment as he was availing prior to his transfer from Tikamgarh to Lidhora.

There being no good ground to interfere, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

(SANJAY YADAV) JUDGE VT/

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2012 Same Parties Devidayal Balmik vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Education