Chhattisgarh Court October 2012 Judgments
Jagdish Sahu Vs. 1 State of Chhattisgarh Through Defendants the Collec ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-30-2012
HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR First Appeal No 93 of 2012 Jagdish Sahu ...Petitioners Versus 1 State of Chhattisgarh through Defendants the Collector District Durg CG 2 Kasturchand Loda 3 Fatte Lal Loda 4 M s Sunil Trading Comp ...Respondents ! Shri Sanjay S Agrawal counsel for the appellant ^ Shri G D Vaswani G A for the State respondent No 1 Shri Rajeev Shrivastav counsel for respondents No 2 to 4 Coram: HONBLE SHRI N K AGARWAL J Dated:30. 10/2012 : Judgement (Delivered on 30.10.2012) APPEAL UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE1. The instant appeal filed under Section 96 of the C.P.C. is directed against the order dated 14th June, 2012 passed by the 3rd Additional District Judge, Durg in Civil Suit No. 22-A/2012 whereby the trial Court rejected the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the C.P.C.2. This is a prime example of how a judicial process is being misused by the litigants.3. Facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are summarized herein below: (i) The responden...
Tag this Judgment!Vijendra Singh Bais and Others Vs. the State of Chhattisgarh Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
ORDER 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 15.01.2003 (Annexure P/1) whereby the pay scale granted to the petitioners i.e. Rs. 8000- 13500/- was reduced to Rs. 6500-10500/- on the objection taken in the audit conducted by the office of the Accountant General and to declare that the petitioners are entitled to receive pay scale of RS. 8000-13500/- The petitioners further pray that they may be granted promotion of rank or pay scale as they have completed 15 years of service. 2. The facts, as projected by the petitioners are that the petitioners were initially appointed as District Legal Aid Officers (for short `the DLAOs'), through direct recruitment on the pay scale of 425-1050 under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Ke Kamjor Vergon Ke Liye Vidhik Sahayata Tatha Vidhik Salah Adhiniyam, 1976 (for short `the Act, 1976'). The Madhya Pradesh Legal Aid and Service Board was constituted under Section 3 of the Act 1976. The M.P. Legal Aid Board resolved that ti...
Tag this Judgment!Vijendra Singh Bais and Others Vs. the State of Chhattisgarh Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-29-2012
HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION No 1356 of 2003 Vijendra Singh Bais & Others ...Petitioners VERSUS The State of Chhattisgarh Others ...Respondents ! Shri K R Nair Advocate for the petitioners ^ Shri V V S Moorthy Depty Advocate General for the State No 1 Ms Renu Singh No 2 Shri Ashish Shrivastva No 3 Dr N K Shukla S Coram: Honble Shri Satish K Agnihotri J Dated:29. 10/2012 : Judgement ORDER (Delivered on 29th day of October, 2012) 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 15.01.2003 (Annexure P/1) whereby the pay scale granted to the petitioners i.e. Rs. 8000- 13500/- was reduced to Rs. 6500-10500/- on the objection taken in the audit conducted by the office of the Accountant General and to declare that the petitioners are entitled to receive pay scale of RS. 8000-13500/- The petitioners further pray that they may be granted promotion of rank or pay scale as they have completed 15 years of service.2. The facts, as projected by the pet...
Tag this Judgment!Banwari Lal Agrawal Vs. Jai Singh Agrawal and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-16-2012
(Application on behalf of the proposed petitioner for grant of permission to be substituted as petitioner in Election Petition No. 2/2009) Sunil Kumar Sinha, J. (1) The petitioner and the respondent contested the Election of Member of Legislative Assembly from Korba Constituency No. 21. The result was declared on 8.12.2008. The respondent was declared elected. The election of the respondent was called in question by the petitioner by filing Election Petition No. 2/2009. On 1.5.2009, the petitioner filed an application (I.A. No. 8/2009) for withdrawal of the Election Petition. The proposed withdrawal was published in Official Gazette in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 109 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act 1951'). The copy of the Gazette Notice dated 1st of July, 2009 regarding publication of withdrawal was brought on record. No objections were received. The respondent also did not object the withdrawal. I.A. No. 8/2009, therefor...
Tag this Judgment!Maa Mahamaya Industries Ltd. and Other Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-09-2012
WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. In these petitions under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the respective petitioners have sought quashment of the order dated 02.04.2012 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.2 in exercise of powers under Section 127(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (henceforth "the Act") transferring the cases of 5 assessees namely (1) M/s. Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited; (2) M/s. G.V.A. Private Limited; (3) M/s. Shri Ma Mahamaya Power Limited ;(4) M/s. V.S.G. Power and Ispat (P) Limited and Shri Ashok Kumar Agrawal, the respective petitioners of W.P(T).No.30, 31, 32, 33 and 34 of 2012 from the Assessing Officer at Raipur i.e., ACIT-2(1), Raipur-2 to the Assessing Officer, VSP i.e. ACIT-CC-I, Visakhapatnam. Similar order with respect to 9 other group companies have been passed on 31.05.2012 for the assesses namely (1) Smt. Anita Agrawal; (2) Shri Anunai Agrawal; (3) Shri Ram Charan Agrawal; (4) Shri Ram Gopal Agrawal; (5)...
Tag this Judgment!B.P. Shrivastava Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-08-2012
PETITION U/A 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the memo dated 7.12.1986 (Annexure H) and 22.02.1988 (Annexure I), to direct the respondent No. 1 to 3 to promote the petitioner on the post of Senior Agriculture Development Officer (for short `the SADO') w.e.f. 28.10.1971, a date earlier to the respondent No. 7, to fix the seniority above the respondent No. 3, to confirm the petitioner alongwith respondents giving a prior notional date, to promote the petitioner as Assistant Director of Agriculture w.e.f. 01.04.1980, from the date his juniors were promoted, and to pay consequential benefits on promotion to the post of SADO w.e.f. 28.10.1971 and as Assistant Director of Agriculture w.e.f. 01.04.1980. 2. The facts, as projected by the petitioner are that he was appointed as Agriculture Assistant (Lower Division) in the respondent department on 25.07.1963. The respondent No. 3 to 11 joined on the same post after joining of the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Shubham Tejwani Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
(Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent/State to conduct an enquiry about non- selection of the petitioner for participating in 10th National Level School Badminton Sports Meet held at Delhi and to punish the erring officials for dereliction in discharging their official duties. The petitioner further seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the name of the petitioner as participant in the National Level Badminton Sports Meet held at Delhi and to grant him all consequential benefits and also grant compensation of Rs.50,000/- for illegally striking of his name from the list of selected players who were required to participate in National Level Sports Badminton Meet. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, as projected by the petitioner, are that under School Education Department for encouraging social and cultural activities amongst students, the department organizes several spo...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Kumar JaIn Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh Now State of Chhattisgarh ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-05-2012
Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the legality and validity of the circular/order dated 23.11.1996 (Annexure - P/1) passed by the respondent No.2, by which the respondent No.2 restrained the Zila Panchayat, Janpad Panchayat, Gram Panchayat from issuing the Transit Permits (for short "the T.P."), and also the memo dated 09.12.1996 (Annexure - P/2) issued by the respondent No.2 to the Divisional Forest Officer, Social Forestry, Ambikapur, in respect of transportation of the cut trees. 2. The case of the petitioner, in short, is that the petitioner is a businessman and is dealing in sale and supply of several goods including timber and wood. In the year 1996, the petitioner purchased Haldu trees growing in the lands belonging to Bhuswamis of Village Asandih, Gram Panchayat Asandih, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District Sarguja.Thereafter, the Bhomiswamis made an application before the Sarpanch and req...
Tag this Judgment!Deepak Kumar Agrawal Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Limited and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Oct-04-2012
ORDER WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. Challenge in this petition is to the communication dated 12.05.2012 issued by the respondent No. 2, whereby the application of the petitioner for award of LPG Distributorship at Sariya, District Raigarh under CC category, advertised on 01.11.2011, was rejected. The petitioner further seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to award the LPG Distributorship for the aforestated place, to the petitioner. 2. Shri Kotecha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has fulfilled all the basic requirement and is eligible for allotment of the Distributorship. The ground on which his application has been rejected, is not proper as the offences indicated in the impugned communication are not of moral turpitude or economic offences. Thus, his candidature could not have been rejected without holding that the offences for which the petitioner was convicted, were of moral turpitude or ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›