Riyaz Mohammad Khan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Riyaz Mohammad Khan vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Sep 19, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1089947

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/1089947
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Sep 19, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Riyaz Mohammad Khan

Advocate Shri. Anoop Shrivastava

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

.....on account of non-compliance of the provisions of section 25-f of the industrial disputes act. it is stated that the state had filed a w.p.no.2535/2012 against the award passed by the collector and the labour court, which was dismissed by order dated 15-2-2012 maintaining the order of reinstatement. it is further submitted that the collector, sehore, instead of complying with the order of this court in letter and spirit, has now issued the impugned order dated 27-7-2013 by which the petitioner has not been reinstated at the place where he was working at the time of disengagement but has issued orders engaging him for a fixed period up till 31-3-2014 for election duty which is contrary to the orders and directions issued by this court regarding reinstatement. it is submitted that in such circumstances, the respondent/authorities be directed to strictly comply with the order passed by this court in the aforesaid w.p.no.2535/2012 in letter and spirit. having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and after perusing the record, it is observed that the petitioner, without approaching the concerned authority for mitigation of his grievance, has directly approached this court by filing the present petition. in the circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent no.3, collector, sehore, by filing a representation for mitigation of his grievance. it goes without saying that in case the petitioner does so alongwith a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition within a week of obtaining the same, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the petitioner's representation in accordance with law as early as possible. it is made clear that the collector, sehore, shall ensure the compliance of the order passed by this court as well as by the labour court, bhopal, subject to the provisions of the law and subsequent powers conferred upon the authority. the aforesaid.....

Full Judgment

Writ Petition No.15019 / 2013 (Riyaz Mohammad Khan ..Vs..State of M.P.& otheRs.19-09-2013 Heard Shri Anoop Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission.

The petitioner has filed this petition submitting that the petitioner was initially removed while working as a peon in the establishment of the respondents against which he had approached the Labour Court, Bhopal, who had passed an award in favour of the petitioner on 17-11-2011 directing reinstatement on account of non-compliance of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act.

It is stated that the State had filed a W.P.No.2535/2012 against the award passed by the Collector and the Labour Court, which was dismissed by order dated 15-2-2012 maintaining the order of reinstatement.

It is further submitted that the Collector, Sehore, instead of complying with the order of this Court in letter and spirit, has now issued the impugned order dated 27-7-2013 by which the petitioner has not been reinstated at the place where he was working at the time of disengagement but has issued orders engaging him for a fixed period up till 31-3-2014 for election duty which is contrary to the orders and directions issued by this Court regarding reinstatement.

It is submitted that in such circumstances, the respondent/authorities be directed to strictly comply with the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid W.P.No.2535/2012 in letter and spirit.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and after perusing the record, it is observed that the petitioner, without approaching the concerned authority for mitigation of his grievance, has directly approached this Court by filing the present petition.

In the circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent No.3, Collector, Sehore, by filing a representation for mitigation of his grievance.

It goes without saying that in case the petitioner does so alongwith a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition within a week of obtaining the same, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the petitioner's representation in accordance with law as early as possible.

It is made clear that the Collector, Sehore, shall ensure the compliance of the order passed by this Court as well as by the Labour Court, Bhopal, subject to the provisions of the law and subsequent powers conferred upon the authority.

The aforesaid exercise shall be completed by the Collector, Sehore before 31-3-2014.

With the aforesaid directions, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.

C.C.as per rules.

(R.S.Jha) Judge mct

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Riyaz Mohammad Khan vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Education