Ram Kripal Vs. the Collector

Ram Kripal vs The Collector

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Feb 22, 2013

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1053987

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/1053987
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Feb 22, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ram Kripal

Respondent

The Collector

Excerpt

writ petition no.503/2013 22.2.2013 shri arvind soni, advocate, for the petitioner. shri rahul jain, government advocate, for the state. the petitioner is a resident of chhatarpur. according to him on 18.2.2008 he, vide annexure p1, had applied for licence for holding a 12 bore gun before respondent no.1 collector, chhatarpur, but till this date no final order has been passed on it. the learned counsel for petitioner has, therefore, prayed this this petition be finally disposed of with a direction to respondent no.1 to finally decide the application within a reasonable period. to this prayer, the learned government advocate has no objection. accordingly, with the consent of learned counsel for parties, this petition is being finally disposed of with a direction to respondent no.1 to decide the application, annexure p1, of the petitioner within a reasonable time but not later than six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. certified copy as per rules. judge ps

Full Judgment

Writ Petition No.503/2013 22.2.2013 Shri Arvind Soni, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Shri Rahul Jain, Government Advocate, for the State.

The petitioner is a resident of Chhatarpur.

According to him on 18.2.2008 he, vide Annexure P1, had applied for licence for holding a 12 bore gun before respondent no.1 Collector, Chhatarpur, but till this date no final order has been passed on it.

The learned counsel for petitioner has, therefore, prayed this this petition be finally disposed of with a direction to respondent no.1 to finally decide the application within a reasonable period.

To this prayer, the learned Government Advocate has no objection.

Accordingly, with the consent of learned counsel for parties, this petition is being finally disposed of with a direction to respondent no.1 to decide the application, Annexure P1, of the petitioner within a reasonable time but not later than six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

Certified copy as per rules.

JUDGE ps

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Ram Kripal vs The Collector Same Subject Education