Madhya Pradesh Court June 1975 Judgments
Ashok Kumar Mukherjee Vs. the Registrar of High Court of Madhya Prades ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-1975
Reported in: AIR1976MP25
Raina, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the reversion of the petitioner from the post of Civil Judge, Class I to the post of Civil Judge, Class II.2. The petitioner was appointed as Civil Judge in 1962, and was confirmed in 1964. He was initially posted as Civil Judge, Class II and continued to occupy that post until he was appointed as Civil Judge Class I at Umaria on 24-5-1968. On 13-5-1969, he was transferred to Seoni as Civil Judge Class II vide Annexure 'B'. According to the petitioner, this amounted to reduction in rank. He, therefore, challenged the order dated 13-5-1969 on the ground that it was in contravention of Article 311 of the Constitution and also on the ground that it was in violation of Articles 14 and 16 thereof.3. The Division Bench of this Court before which the petition came up for hearing referred the following questions for decision to a larger Bench in view of the decision of this Court in B.A. Nigam v...
Tag this Judgment!Lacchi Alias Laxminarayan Vs. the State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-11-1975
Reported in: AIR1976MP11
Raina, J.1. This is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The petitioner carries on the. business of embroidery at Naya Sarafa, Lashkar, Gwalior. On 29-10-1974, the District Magistrate, Gwalior, passed an order of detention against tbe petitioner under Sub-clause (ii) of Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') vide An-nexnre P-1. On 29-10-74, the petitioner was furnished with the grounds of detention vide Annexure P-2, He submitted a representation against the order of detention to the Government. Thereupon, the case of the petitioner was referred to the Advisory Board. The Board approved the order of detention and, after considering the report of the Advisory Board, the State Government confirmed the order of detention. So far, the facts are not in dispute.3. The petitioner has challenged the order of detention on a number of grounds in this petition an...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›