Rajesh Kumar Niranjan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Rajesh Kumar Niranjan vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Dec 14, 2012

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1052529

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/1052529
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Dec 14, 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rajesh Kumar Niranjan

Advocate Smt. Amrit Ruprah, Smt. Ruprah

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Advocate Shri. B.P.Pandey, Smt. Sudha Gautam, Shri. Sameer Seth

Excerpt

w.p.no.15543/2011 14.12.2012: smt. amrit ruprah, learned counsel for the petitioner. shri b.p.pandey, learned counsel for respondent state. smt. sudha gautam, learned counsel for respondent no.4. shri sameer seth, learned counsel for respondent no.5. the only dispute not subsisting for adjudication is as to whether the petitioner is disqualified from seeking appointment because he is related to the sarpanch shri karan singh as nephew. smt. ruprah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the initial process of appointment was undertaken in the year 2008 and when the original resolution dated 13.7.2008 was passed appointing respondent no.5 as panchayat karmi and when the cause of action accrued to the petitioner, at that point of time there was no relationship between the petitioner and sarpanch and shri karan singh was not sarpanch at that point of time. if that be so, this disqualification alleged by respondent no.5 may not be available. accordingly, smt. ruprah is granted two weeks time to file appropriate affidavit. list in the week commencing 13.1.2013. (rajendra menon) judge mrs.mishra

Full Judgment

W.P.No.15543/2011 14.12.2012: Smt.

Amrit Ruprah, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri B.P.Pandey, learned counsel for respondent State.

Smt.

Sudha Gautam, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

Shri Sameer Seth, learned counsel for respondent No.5.

The only dispute not subsisting for adjudication is as to whether the petitioner is disqualified from seeking appointment because he is related to the Sarpanch Shri Karan Singh as nephew.

Smt.

Ruprah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the initial process of appointment was undertaken in the year 2008 and when the original resolution dated 13.7.2008 was passed appointing respondent No.5 as Panchayat Karmi and when the cause of action accrued to the petitioner, at that point of time there was no relationship between the petitioner and Sarpanch and Shri Karan Singh was not Sarpanch at that point of time.

If that be so, this disqualification alleged by respondent No.5 may not be available.

Accordingly, Smt.

Ruprah is granted two weeks time to file appropriate affidavit.

List in the week commencing 13.1.2013.

(Rajendra Menon) Judge mrs.mishra

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2012 Same Parties Rajesh Kumar Niranjan vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Education