Madhya Pradesh Court September 2008 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.
M.P. Transport Workers Federation and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)MPHT374
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. In this batch of writ petitions, the assail is to the constitutional validity of Sub-section (4) of Section 1 and Section 1-A of the M.P. Industrial Relations Act, 1960 (for brevity 'the 1960 Act') and the notification issued under the said provisions. The said provisions were introduced by M.P. Act No. 16 of 2000 by the Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Sambandh (Sanshodhan) Adhiniyam, 2000 with a stipulation that the said provision would come into force on such date as the State Government may, by notification, appoint and was brought into force by notification dated 17-5-2006 from the date of publication of the notification. The petitioners have also challenged the notification issued in exercise of power conferred under Sub-section (4) of Section 1 of the 1960 Act by the State Government whereby it has directed that the provisions of the said Act shall not apply to the industries specified in the Schedule to the said notification with a postulate that the said exclusio...
Sivanand Damahe Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT288
ORDERSanjay Yadav, J.1. The petitioner by way of present writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, besides calling in question the legal validity of the orders dated 8-1-2007 (Annexure R-4-4) and the consequential orders passed thereof and as contained in Annexures R-4-5, R-4-6, R-4-7, R-4-8 and R-4-11 is seeking a mandamus that a liquor licence granted in favour of respondent No. 5 be cancelled and may not be extended for the years 2008 and 2009 for the Partala Block of District Chhindwara. Further direction is also sought to the effect that the respondents be directed to allow the petitioner to take possession of the shops and commence the sale of liquor as per the contract.2. The facts briefly noted are that with the advent of new excise policy in the year 2005-06 small contractors got the opportunity to take part in the contract of country liquor and foreign liquor. The petitioner, in response to his participation in the bidding of liquor license was a...
Kashi @ Kashiram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)MPHT208
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24-3-1999 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Damoh in S.T. No. 8/99, convicting the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC and thereby sentencing him to suffer imprisonment of life and 7 years respectively with further stipulation that both the sentences shall run concurrently, this appeal has been preferred by him under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. In brief the case of prosecution is that earlier to the incident, appellant committed murder of the son of his uncle Ramkishan Yadav (P.W. 1), eventually he was tried and in Sessions Trial No. 75/83, he was convicted and was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment on 31-7-1984. As per the case of prosecution, because father of the appellant Parasram (hereinafter to be referred as 'the deceased') did not help him in that case, hence, he was having annoyance against the deceased.3. On 14-11-1998, Ramkishan Yadav w...
Shivanand Misra Vs. M.P. Road Transport Corporation and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-15-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR819]; (2009)IILLJ239MP
R.S. Jha, J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition claiming relief in respect of payment of bonus and over time etc.Shri Shobhit Aditya, learned Counsel for the respondents submits that in view of the decision of the respondents dated July 24,2002 the petitioner's representation regarding his entitlement to the aforesaid claim can be considered by the respondents. However, in case, the representation is rejected or the relief claimed by the petitioner is disputed, the remedy of the petitioner lies before the Labour Court as he has an alternative efficacious remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act and the present petition could not be maintainable.2. In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the respondents, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-authorities to consider the petitioner's representation to the extent of the entitlement in respect of the claim made by him. It is made clear that the aforesaid direction is issued in view of the un...
State of Madhya Pradesh and anr. Vs. Western Coalfields Limited and an ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)MPHT285
R.S. Garg, J.1. The appellant-State being aggrieved by the judgment dated 18-7-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in group of Writ Petition Nos. 359/02 (Western Coalfields Limited and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Anr.), 717/2002 (Western Coalfields Limited and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Anr.), 1742/2002 (Western Coalfields Limited and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Anr.), 1743/2002 (Western Coalfields Limited and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Anr.), 1744/2002 (Western Coalfields Limited and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Anr.) and W.P. No. 1745/2002 (Western Coalfields Limited and Ors. v. State of M.P. and Anr.) have filed these five Writ Appeal Nos. 1203/2006, (State of M.P. and Anr. v. Western Coalfields Limited and Anr.), 1204/2006 (State of M.P. and Anr. v. Western Coalfields Limited and Anr.), 1205/2006 (State of M.P. and Anr. v. Western Coalfields Limited and Ors.), 1206/2006 (State of M.P. and Anr. v. Western Coalfields Limited and Anr.) and 1207/2006 (State of M.P. and Anr. v....
Dharmesh Humaney Vs. the Housing and Urban Development Corporation Ltd ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-2008
Reported in: 2009(2)MPHT452
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.1. The petitioner is working on the post of Sr. Manager in the Housing and Urban Development Corporation (for short 'HUDCO'), a Government of India Enterprises Funded and Controlled by Union of India. He has been transferred by the third respondent vide order dated 20-9-07 (Annexure P-19) from the post of Incharge-RSU, Indore to Regional Office, Chennai for his further posting. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this petition.2. According to the petitioner, the impugned transfer order is illegal, arbitrary, and is based on malafides. He stated that his transfer from Indore to a distant place like Chennai has been issued by the 3rd respondent, as he raised voice against him as well as many other superior officers for the illegalities committed by them. He further averred that in the last 10 years, he has been transferred six times prior to completion of his normal tenure of five years on every occasion. He stated that the Chairman-cum-Managing Director (...
Shakuntala JaIn Vs. Vinod and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-2008
Reported in: 2008ACJ276
Arun Mishra, J.1. The appeal has been preferred by the claimant for enhancement of compensation calling in question the award dated 30.11.2004 passed by Eighth Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claim Case No. 30 of 2004.2. The claimant Shakuntala sustained fracture of pelvic bone. She is aged 55 years. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 18,475 along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of claim petition till realization. The insurer has been exonerated as the driver was holding licence to drive light motor vehicle whereas he was driving motor cycle for which he was not holding licence.3. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, in my opinion, the Tribunal has not awarded adequate compensation as well as illegally exonerated the insurer from making payment of compensation determined by the Tribunal, the liability ought to have been joint and several.4. First coming to question of quantum of compensation awarded. Fracture of ...
Rekhchand Son of Ayodhya Dehariya Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh Through ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-11-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT464
ORDERRakesh Saksena, J.1. Applicant has filed this revision against the order dated 20.1.1998, passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara in Criminal Appeal No. 33/97, affirming the judgment dated 25.2.1997, passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amarwada in Criminal Case No. 457/1995, convicting the applicant under Section 9 and 49A read with Section 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs. 5000/-.2. According to prosecution, on 29.1.1995, K.P. Dhurve, Sub Inspector, on receiving information from an informer that applicant possessed leather of leopard, searched his house in presence of witnesses Ramdas, Punaram and Ramdeen and seized a leather of leopard vide seizure memo Ex. P/2. After obtaining the opinion from Dr. S.R. Suryawanshi, he registered a case under Section 9, 49A read with Section 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (for brevity 'the Act') against him and after investigation...
R.B. Guhe Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-11-2008
Reported in: 2008(5)MPHT291
R.S. Garg, J.1. The appellant being aggrieved by the order dated 10-7-2008 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 23519/2003 has filed this writ appeal submitting inter alia that the learned Single Judge was unjustified in observing that the appellant would not be entitled to the back wages on application of the principle of 'No Work No Pay'.2. The short facts, necessary for disposal of the present writ application, are that the appellant who was working as Senior Cooperative Inspector made a representation in the year 1966 and thereafter reminded the Government that he was entitled to certain benefits. However, nothing was done in his favour, therefore, he filed Original Application No. 1066/1996 before the State Administrative Tribunal. After abolition of the State Administrative Tribunal the matter came to this Court and was registered as Writ Petition No. 23519/2003.3. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, the learned Single Judge relying upon Fu...
Sant Kumar Agrawal Vs. Laxmibai National Institute of Physical Educati ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-11-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT446
ORDERS.C. Sharma, J.1. The petitioner before this Court a retired employee has filed a writ petition i.e., W.P. No. 1991/2006 (S) challenging the decision of the Board of Management of Laxmibai National Institute of Physical Education, Gwalior by which he has been retired w.e.f. 28-2-2002 and has also filed another writ petition i.e., W.P. No. 108/2006 (S) challenging the charge-sheet dated 5-10-2005 issued by the Competent Authority and also the further disciplinary proceedings, arising out of the same issue relating to correction of date of birth in his service book and, therefore, both the writ petitions were heard analogously together and disposed of by this singular order. For the sake of convenience, the facts in Writ Petition No. 1991 of 2006 (S) are exposited herein.2. The petitioner before this Court in W.P. No. 1991/2006 (S) being aggrieved by a decision dated 12th January, 2006 taken by the Board of Management of Lakshmibai National Institute of Physical Education, Gwalior h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »