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.

(Dr. ) Mohan Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

(Dr. ) Mohan Tiwari vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jan 08, 2013
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1053288

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

(Dr. ) Mohan Tiwari

Advocate Shri. Hemant Shrivastava

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

writ appeal no.1207/201”08. 01.2013 shri hemant shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant. shri vijay pandey, learned deputy advocate general, for the respondents-state. admit. taken up for final hearing by consent of parties. this intra court appeal has been filed by the appellant under section 2(1) of the m.p.uchcha nyayalaya (khand nyayapeeth ko appeal) adhiniyam, 2005, against the order dated 24.09.2012 passed in w.p.no.15701/2012 (s) by the learned single judge. having heard for sometime, we are of the opinion that interest of justice would be served if the appellant is allowed to raise preliminary objection against the departmental action being initiated against him, to satisfy the authorities that the claim when made was legal and, therefore, he should not be proceeded against on that ground. the respondents shall consider the preliminary objection and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of four weeks after receipt of the preliminary objection. with this modification, there is no need to entertain the appeal any further. the writ appeal is accordingly disposed of. certified copy as per rules. (s.a.bobde) (k.k.trivedi) chief justice judge skc

Full Judgment

WRIT APPEAL No.1207/201”

08. 01.2013 Shri Hemant Shrivastava, learned Counsel for the appellant.

Shri Vijay Pandey, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents-State.

Admit.

Taken up for final hearing by consent of parties.

This intra court appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 2(1) of the M.P.Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, against the order dated 24.09.2012 passed in W.P.No.15701/2012 (S) by the learned Single Judge.

Having heard for sometime, we are of the opinion that interest of justice would be served if the appellant is allowed to raise preliminary objection against the departmental action being initiated against him, to satisfy the authorities that the claim when made was legal and, therefore, he should not be proceeded against on that ground.

The respondents shall consider the preliminary objection and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of four weeks after receipt of the preliminary objection.

With this modification, there is no need to entertain the appeal any further.

The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

(S.A.Bobde) (K.K.Trivedi) Chief Justice Judge Skc

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial