Madhya Pradesh Court September 2003 Judgments
Mohd. Usman Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4085; 2004(3)MPLJ482
ORDERS.L. Jain, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 25-9-2001 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chindwara in Criminal Case No. 1395/02, the petitioner has filed this revision invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. Facts of the case which led to filing of this revision are that Executive Engineer, M.P. Electricity Board lodged a report at police station Chhindwara, alleging that on 22-5-1995 eight Transformers were issued to Ramesh Patankar, Assistant Lineman from Regional Store of M.P. Electricity Board located at Chandangaon. Gate pass Nos. 40, 39 and 41 were also issued. Since the vehicle for transportation was not available on that day, transformers could not be carried to their destination. On 25-5-1995 Assistant Lineman Ramesh Patankar transported only 3 transformers to Umarnala but remaining 5 transformers were not sent to Umarnala and they were misappropriated. The register maintained by security guard rev...
Tag this Judgment!Mirza Hasan Beg Vs. Smt. Ishrat Yasmeen
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4330; 2004(3)MPLJ177
ORDERS.L. Jain, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 17-4-98 passed by 4th Addl. Sessions Judge, Chhattarpur, in Criminal Revision No. 160/97, the applicant has filed this petition invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. Facts of the case which led to filing of this petition are that the applicant is the wife of non-applicant. She filed an application under Section 125 Cr. P.C. for grant of maintenance. The trial Court passed an ex-parte order dated 7-8-95 and granted maintenance to the non-applicant @ Rs. 500/-per month, against the applicant. The applicant filed a revision before the Sessions Judge for setting aside ex-parte order which was registered as Criminal Revision No. 202/ 1995. Vide order dated 23-11-96 the learned Sessions Judge granted liberty to the applicant to move an application under Section 126(ii) of the Cr. P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate First Class. Accordingly, the applicant filed an application ...
Tag this Judgment!B.R. Associates Ltd. and anr. Vs. M.P. State Electricity Board and ors ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2003
Reported in: AIR2005MP51; 2004(1)MPHT32; 2004(1)MPLJ29
ORDERRajendra Menon, J.1. In both these petitions prayer made is exactly similar and identical and the cause of action for filing petitions are also identical. That apart, as common questions are involved they are being disposed of by this common order.2. Petitioners in both these petitions have claimed the following reliefs:--'In the aforesaid circumstances it is respectfully submitted that a mandate be issued to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to re-connect the electric connection severed by them for no fault of the petitioner-Company which has suffered loss of crores of rupees, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 be directed to compensate the petitioner-Company with the loss they have suffered, and all the bills issued after 1-10-99 be quashed.'3. Facts giving arise to filing of the petitions are that in the night intervening 30th September, 1999 and 1st October, 1999 a sudden check was carried by a team of official of the M.P. Slate Electricity Board in the premises of the petitioners who are H.T....
Tag this Judgment!Om Prakash Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT431
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. By this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the pregnability of the order dated 14-12-1999 passed by Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') dismissing the Original Application (O.A. No. 171/95) filed by the petitioner.2. In brief the case, as putforth by the petitioner before the Tribunal is that vide order dated 29-4-1989 he was appointed on the post of Deputy Collector on probation of two years on the recommendation by the Public Service Commission. The petitioner was liable to be confirmed on the said post with effect from the date after passing the departmental examination immediately on the expiry of period of probation, however, as he did not pass the requisite examination, the authorities did not confirm him from the said date. The respondents confirmed the petitioner only after he passed the departmental examination by extendin...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. State Electricity Board Vs. National thermal Power Corporation Lt ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)MPHT432
ORDERS.P. Khare, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 16 of the Electricity Regulatory Commission Act, 1998 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') against the order of the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (for short 'the Commission') by which the review petition filed by the respondent No. 1 National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) has been allowed and the Original Petition No. 78 of 2001 has been 'set down for hearing for reconsideration of its liability to pay 'disincentive' for the period from 1-84996 to 31-3-1998'.2. There is 'incentive' for more generation and 'disincentive' for less generation of electricity by NTPC. It has to pay 'disincentive' as a sort of compensation to those drawing electricity from it. Respondent No. 1 NTPC submitted a petition before the Commission stating therein that nonavailability of gas has caused loss of generation of electricity at Kawas and Gandhar Power Stations and therefore these could not achieve the normative lower limit of op...
Tag this Judgment!Kuldeep Tiwari Vs. Oriental Insurance Company and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: AIR2004MP114; 2003(4)MPHT529; 2004(1)MPLJ64
ORDERRajendra Menon, J.1. Invoking the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226/227 of the Constitution, petitioner has called in question tenability of order (Annexure P-l), dated 30-7-2002, by which the agency of the petitioner as Insurance Agent has been terminated.2. Petitioner was appointed vide Annexure P-3 as an agent in accordance with the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (Licensing of Insurance Agents) Regulations, 2000 for a period of three years from 15-1-2002 for procuring and soliciting business of general insurers. It is the case of the petitioner that after the license was granted to him vide Annexure P-3 he had been discharging his duties effectively and sincerely to the fullest satisfaction of the competent authority. He has procured the business as required under the Rules, but in an arbitrary manner without giving him any opportunity of hearing, without issuing show-cause notice and in total disregard an in-violation of the principle ...
Tag this Judgment!Chandrabhan Dubey Vs. Manoj Kumari and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ1173
Shantanu Kemkar, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is directed against the award dated 27.2.1998, passed by First Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mur-wara (Katni), in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 153 of 1991.2. Briefly stated the facts are that, on 19.10.1991 one Mangal Prasad Tiwari was travelling along with 50-60 persons in the tractor-trolley owned by the appellant. After 'Durga Visarjan' when the tractor was coming back, on way, because of jerk Mangal Prasad fell down and received multiple injuries. He was admitted to the hospital but ultimately he succumbed to the injuries on 30.10.1991. Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 who are wife and two sons of the deceased, filed an application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 13,47,000 for the death of Mangal Prasad. The appellant/owner and respondent No. 4 insurer of the vehicle involved in the accident contested the application. After recordi...
Tag this Judgment!Mathura Prasad Dixit Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT298; 2004(2)MPLJ113
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 26-2-1998 (Annexure P-1) by which the petitioner has been removed from service.2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was employed as a Constable in Railway Protection Special Force at Itarsi. He was placed under suspension by order dated 9-5-1997 (Annexure P-3). He was not paid subsistence allowance from 9-5-1997 to 29-10-1997 as per rules. He was served with a charge-sheet dated 3-11-1997. The charge against him was that he sat on 'hunger strike' on 29-10-1997 and thereby he committed breach of Rule 147 (XV) of R.P.F. Rules, 1987. The petitioner was paid subsistence allowance upto 29-10-1997 on that very date. The petitioner submitted an application for payment of the subsistence allowance from 29-10-1997 but it was not paid to him. He did not participate in the inquiry which was held at Bina. The report of the enquiry officer was supplied to the petitioner w...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Vyas and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT527
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. The decision rendered in this petition shall also govern disposal of other connected writ petition being No. 854 of 2003.2. The only grievance of the writ petitioners appears to be that they were called tor an interview for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I and II and for that purpose even call letters were also issued treating these petitioners to be eligible for appearing in the interview. But, thereafter process of interview was not brought to an end and no interview was held till date. One of the submissions, rather main submission of the respondent - State and their authorities is that on account of ban imposed by the Election Commission as also by the Finance Department on the recruitment of fresh employees in various Departments of the State, the process of interview was not allowed to continue and hence the same was not conducted.3. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and having perused the record of the case, this Court is of the considered o...
Tag this Judgment!Govind Vakil Vs. Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT390; 2003(4)MPLJ532
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 19-11-1997 (Annexure P-1) by which the penalty of 'stoppage of two annual grade increments with cumulative effect' has been imposed upon the petitioner and the order dated 13-1-2000 (Annexure P-26) by which his period of absence from 1-5-1981 to 15-2-1993 has been treated as 'Dies non' under F.R. 18.2. The petitioner was Assistant Professor in Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwavidyalaya (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the University'). He was served with a charge-sheet on 7-7-1986. There were two charges against him. The first was that he was in the habit of remaining absent from duty. He was absent from 25-4-1977 to 3-3-1981, The second charge was that he was absent from duty from 1-5-1981 to 7-7-1986 without the sanction of leave. So far as the first charge is concerned it was subsequently regularised. On the second charge the departmental enquiry was held. The pet...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »