Madhya Pradesh Court December 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Mahesh Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT263; 2005(1)MPLJ532
ORDERR.V. Raveendran, C.J.1. The petitioner claims that he was engaged on daily wage basis in the establishment of Electrical Foreman (M) at Bina. According to him, after verification of the casual service rendered by him, he was issued a Casual Labour Service Card, in pursuance of which he was given the status of a Monthly Rated Casual Labour (MRCL) with the benefit of pay scale applicable to Group 'D' with effect from 13-4-1983. He was working continuously thereafter as a MRCL.2. When the matters stood thus, he was issued a charge-memo, dated 5-7-1990 alleging that he had obtained the position of MRCL by producing a fake Casual Labour Service Card. The charge-memo was followed by an inquiry. The Inquiry Officer submitted a report holding the petitioner guilty of the charge. After furnishing a copy thereof to the petitioner, with opportunity to show cause, the Disciplinary Authority passed an order dated 27/29-10-1993 accepting the findings in the inquiry report and imposing the penal...
Ajay Krishna Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)CTLJ441(MP); 2005(1)MPHT299; 2005(1)MPLJ306
ORDERK.K. Lahoti, J.1. Petitioner has sought following reliefs in this petition :-'(i) Hon'ble High Court be pleased to quash the tender notice as published in the new paper Nai Duniya, Indore on 7-10-2004 to the extent it imposed conditions as a pre-condition for issuance of tender form and also to the extent it provides condition of deposit of Earnest Money alongwith application form for issuance of tender form.(ii) Hon'ble High Court be pleased to declare that the action of the respondents is arbitrary unlawful and void.(iii) Hon'ble High Court be pleased to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to participate in the tender evaluation process by issuing tender form to the petitioner without satisfying three conditions laid down and without having to deposit Earnest Money alongwith application form.(iv) Hon'ble High Court be pleased to declare that the action of the respondents in imposing the unlawful conditions denies the precious right of the petitioner to participate in ...
Jay Engineering Works Ltd. Vs. Industry Facilitation Council and anr. Overruled
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Reported in: IV(2005)BC64
P.C. Agarwal, J.1. Present is a intra Court appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent against the impugned order of the Single Judge in W.P. No. 1156/2003 dismissing the same.2. Facts necessary for decision of this appeal are as follows:(A) Jay Engineering Works Ltd. (to be called as appellant) is a public limited company engaged in business of manufacture of electric fans and fuel injection equipments. M/s. Diamond Wire Ltd. (to be called as R 2) is a small scale industry and supplier of copper wires. Industry Facilitation Council (to be called as council-R1) is a statutory authority formed under the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 (Act of 1993 for short).(B) Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (to be called BIFR) had declared the appellant as a sick unit under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (to be called as SICA) on 8.4.1994 vide (Annexure-A/3). A rehabilitation scheme for the ap...
Nahar Allied Agencies Vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)MPHT139
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioner has assailed the order (P-7) passed by learned Trial Court allowing impleadment of respondent No. 3 as already of the proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.2. Facts in short giving rise to present writ petition are that the petitioner; Nahar Allied Agencies was appointed as dealer of the LPG on 16-8-1984 in the territory of Chhindwara and Pandurna under Clause 2(b)(iii) of the dealership agreement by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited. It is provided that the Corporation has right to appoint one or more dealers. Respondent No. 3 was appointed as dealer for Pandurna under the physically handicapped category. Petitioner; Nahar Allied Agencies filed an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in which relief was prayed to restrain the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited from transferring its customer to respondent No. 3 namely; Gopal Rathi. The applicati...
Sirpal Singh Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT358
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. On going through the petition, it is gathered that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Squad-man vide order dated 19-10-1985, a copy of the appointment order has been placed on record as Annexure A-1. Thereafter, in pursuance to his appointment order, the petitioner started discharging his duties. After having served for nearabout eight years, the petitioner would not have thought during the dawn hours of 17-11-1993 that bright afternoon of that day would become the darkest day of his life as his dry bread will be snatched. On going through Annexure A-5, dated 17-11-1993, it is gathered that by casting stigma on the petitioner his services were terminated. The approach so adopted by the respondents is wholly unwarranted under the law and amounts to, throttling the provision of Article 311 of the Constitution of India and I do not want to become a party by affirming the said arbitrary action.2. It is well settled in law that if any stigmatic order is ...
Kanchan Singh Rajpur Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT366; 2005(1)MPLJ476
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner is challenging the pregnability of the order (Annexure A-1) passed by Divisional Forest Officer, Sukhtawa Kshathipurthi Vanikaran Mandal, Hoshangabad as well as the appellate order dated 20-1 -1993 (Annexure A-2) passed by conservator of Forest. 2. The unfolded facts are that the petitioner was serving under Forest Department. However, vide order dated 10-5-1990 (Annexure A-4) which was passed in pursuance to order No. 470, dated 30-4-1990 the services of petitioner alongwith several persons were deputed to Narmada Ghati Vikas Pradhikaran. On account of certain misconduct committed by petitioner, he was charge-sheeted by the borrowing department and ultimately the punishment order was also passed by the borrowing department and the departmental appeal was also rejected by the same department.3. The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the borrowing department, i.e., Narmada Ghati Vikas Pradhikaran was comp...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jabalpur Co-operative Milk Producers Un ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(MP)334; [2005]276ITR649(MP)
1. The appellant by Shri Rohit Arya, learned senior counsel with Shri Sanjay Lal.2. Heard on admission.3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has not considered Explanation 4 to Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The contention of counsel for the appellant is that under Explanation 4, where the amount of income in respect of which particulars have been concealed or inaccurate particulars have been furnished exceeds the total income assessed, means the tax that would have been chargeable on the income in respect of which particulars have been concealed or inaccurate particulars have been furnished. The question is whether the tax would be chargeable on the income in which all the particulars have been concealed. The respondents have shown loss in income and the Tribunal has held that in the case of loss even after concealment is added then also no tax will be leviable, therefore, the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Senior Accounts Officer, Madhya Pradesh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(MP)276; [2005]276ITR84(MP)
A.M. Sapre J.1. The decision rendered in this appeal shall also govern disposal of the other two appeals being I. T. A. Nos. 146 and 148 of 1999 because all the three appeals are between the same assessee except the difference is that they relate to different assessment years involving common point.2. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue (Commissioner of Income-tax) under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the order dated July 5, 1999, passed by the Tribunal (the ITAT) in I. T. A. No. 751/Ind of 1998. It was admitted for final hearing on the following substantial questions of law :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271C of the Income-tax Act ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that Senior Accounts Officer, MPEB, Indore, cannot be treated as principal officer for want of notice as per Clau...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dr. Ashok Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-09-2004
Reported in: [2005]275ITR350(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue (Income-tax Department) under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against an order dated July 14, 2004, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in IT(SS)/58/Ind of 2002, CO No. 80/Ind of 2002 for the block period 1989-90 and IT(SS)/71/Ind of 2002 for the block period 1989-90.2. In short, the question that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether this appeal involves any substantial question of law as is required to be made out under Section 260A of the Act that being the prerequisite for admission of appeal.3. Heard Shri A. P. Patankar, learned counsel for the appellant.4. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the record of the case, we are of the opinion that the appeal does not involve any substantial question of law for consideration in this appeal and that two questions proposed by the appellant (Revenue) do not satisfy the rigour of substantial question of law within the meaning...
Raju Dubey Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-08-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT372; 2005(1)MPLJ607
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. By this petition the petitioner is seeking the relief of quashment of orders (Annexure A-1 and A-4), dated 9-8-1994 and 5-8-1994 respectively. By these orders, the services of the petitioner has been directed to be terminated with effect from 9-9-1994. It be seen that the impugned orders (Annexures A-1 and A-4 were stayed by the Tribunal vide its order dated 8-9-1994 and the said stay order is still continuing. In the return it has been submitted that a show-cause notice was issued to petitioner but on receiving the reply and after making preliminary enquiry by the respondents, the petitioner's conduct was found not suitable for being retained in the service of police department. It has also been pleaded that looking to the graveness of the complaint against the petitioner his services were terminated after giving one month's notice to him. At this juncture, Annexure A-4 which is a show-cause notice issued by Superintendent of Police to petitioner is also se...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »