Madhya Pradesh Court July 2010 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.
Rakesh Kumar Soni, S/O Late Shri Ram Gopal Soni, and anr. Vs. Tate of ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
1. This order shall govern the disposal of both the above criminal appeals.2. Appellants Rakesh Kumar Soni and Smita Jain have filed these appeals under Section 454 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the orders dated 9.3.2010, passed in Misc. Judicial Case No. 3/2010 and Misc. Judicial Case No.4/2010, by the First Additional Judge to the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Narsinghpur, dismissing the applications filed by them under Section 452 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.3. In short, the facts of the case are that on 29.11.2004, when complainant Rakesh Kumar Soni, Krishna Kumar Jain and Nikhlesh Soni were going in a Centro car from Narsinghpur to Sagar, suddenly some miscreants overtook them by Indigo car and intercepted their car. On the point of revolver they made them to sit in the rear seat of the car and on the way fired a shot by a revolver at Krishna Kumar, which resulted into his death. They also caused injury by the butt of the revolver to Rakesh Kumar Soni...
Executive Engineer, and anr. Vs. Smt. Kalawati and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
1. This is an appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen Compensation Act being aggrieved by the order dated 11.2.2004 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation by which he has allowed the claim and has also allowed the penalty up to the extent of 50% as enumerated under Section 4-A of the Workmen Compensation Act.2. This Court by an order dated18.12.2009 admitted the appeal on the following substantial questions of law:-"1. Whether the employee's death due to dog bite can be termed as arising out of and in the course of employment and if not, whether the employer can be forced to pay compensation? 2. Whether in absence of the notice u/ s. 10 of the workmen Compensation Act, 1923 from the claimant/claimants the non-awareness of the employer can be penalized by a penalty to the tune of 50% of the amount of award u/s 4A(3) Workmen Compensation Act, 1923.3. On the factual scenario when the dog bite two people including the deceased employee, the deceased employee did not take any di...
Anil Kumar Pare. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh.
Court: Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
1. Challenging the gradation list dated 07/06/2002, showing respondent Nos.5 & 6, senior to the petitioner in the cadre of Peons and further challenging the order dated 06/01/2003, granting promotion to respondent Nos.5 & 6 on the post of Asst. Grade-III, ignoring the claim of petitioner, petitioner has filed this writ petition.2. It is the case of petitioner that petitioner and respondent Nos.5 & 6 were recruited in the office of respondent No.4 together on 01/07/1986, in the order annexure P-1 dated 01/07/1986 name of petitioner appears at Sr. No.15, that of respondent No.5 at Sr. No.13 and respondent No.6 at Sr. No.22. It is stated that even though all of them were appointed together, but vide order dated 04/07/1988, respondent No.3 regularized respondent Nos.5 & 6 on the post of Peon in the regular pay-scale Rs.725-900/- vide annexure P-2 dated 04/07/1988, whereas the petitioner was regularized only vide order dated 10/08/1992 on the basis of recommendation of the Screening Committ...
S.K.Logan. Vs. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
1. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by communication dated 21.6.1997 by which the petitioner, who was working in the establishment of the respondents as a Senior Operating Officer, has been compulsorily retired from service with immediate effect.2. The brief facts, leading to the filing of the present petition, are that the petitioner was initially appointed in the establishment of the respondent Board on 15.1.1966 as a Junior Operating Officer and was, thereafter, promoted as Senior Operating Officer on 8.7.1983. As he had completed 25 years of service on 14.1.1991 his case was scrutinized for the purpose of compulsorily retirement in accordance with Rule 42 of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Pension Rules') which have been adopted by the respondent Board and thereafter a decision was taken on 19.6.1997 to compulsorily retire the petitioner from service and he was also given three months pay in lieu of noti...
Laxman Prasad Chaturvedi. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh.
Court: Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
1- Challenging the order-dated 26.3.2003 passed by the Commissioner, Rewa Division in a revision and the order-dated 23.8.2001 Annexure P/15, passed by the Collector on an appeal filed by respondent No.6 Shri Harendra Singh, petitioner has filed this writ petition.2- It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as a Panchayat Karmi in Gram Panchayat Papara, Tehsil Amarpatan, District Satna on 30.9.96. He has been appointed on the basis of a resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat vide Annexure P/1, on 30.9.96, after due approval of the Gram Sabha and after following all the procedure contemplated for appointment of Panchayat Karmi. Documents evidencing these facts are Annexure P/2. It is the case of the petitioner that in a meeting of the Gram Panchayat held earlier in the year 1995, in an illegal manner respondent No.6 Harendra Singh was appointed as a Panchayat Karmi. Subsequently, when his appointment was objected to, the Sarpanch terminated his services vide order-dated 3...
Bhim Rao Tembhekar. Vs. Principal Secretary the State of Madhya Prades ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
1. Shri B.N. Mishra, learned Govt. Advocate for State of M.P. on advance notice.2. Being aggrieved of the order dated 16.08.2010 the petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby the petitioner engaged on daily wage basis as worker (as per petitioner as Chowkidar) is retired on attaining the age of 60 years.3. Though elaborate submissions are made on behalf of the petitioner to establish that he was appointed as per provisions contained under M.P. Forest Department Contingency Paid Employees (Recruitment and Condition of Service) Rules, 1978 and the entitlement to serve till the petitioner attain 62 years, however, on a deeper probe the petition is found wanting of material pleadings and documents to show that he was appointed as per Rule, 1977. The learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, confines her submission to the extent of the parity of the petitioner with worker engaged on Work Charged Establishment.4. The contentions of t...
Govind, and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh.
Court: Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
1. The applicants/accused have preferred this revision under section 397(1) of the Cr.P.C being aggrieved by Order dated 17.2.10 passed by the Vth Add. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Chhindwara in S.T.No.180/09 framing charges against them for the offence under section 465/34,468/34 and 471/34 of the IPC.2. The facts giving rise to this revision in short are that the complainant Smt Kavita Rajput made a complaint in writing to the Superintendent of Police Chhindwara. After holding the preliminary inquiry on it, in view of the prima facie circumstance for committing the offence enumerated under section 420,467,468,471 and 34 of the PC against the applicants, a crime No.902/08 was registered against such persons at Police Station Kotwali, Chhindwara. In investigation of the same, the papers were seized and the interrogatory statements of the complainant as well as the other witnesses were recorded. As per contents of such complaint, the complainant bought some land of village Loniya Karbal ...
Virendra Kuamr Kaithal. Vs. Virendra Kuamr Kaithal.
Court: Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on: Jul-08-2010
1. Petitioner was a candidate, who had participated in the process of selection for appointment to the post of constable in the Government Reserve Police, which was conducted from 4.7.2003 to 30.7.2003. However, as the entire selection was cancelled and the petitioner was also found ineligible for appointment on the basis of certain enquiry conducted in the matter and report submitted vide Annexure P/10, petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the same.2. Shri Dilip Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, points out that initially on the basis of the enquiry report Annexure P/10, the entire selection was cancelled. The cancellation of the entire selection resulted in filing of four writ petitions before this Court. The Writ Petition Nos: 4692/2005, 2591/05, 13451/05(s) and 3690/05, were decided by a common order-dated 11.3.2008 Annexure P/12. It was found by a Bench of this Court that it was only in the case of 14 persons that there was illegality in the process of sele...
L.P.Ahirwar. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-07-2010
1. Heard Shri Mahendra Pateriya, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission as well as interim relief.2. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for quashing of charge sheet issued to the petitioner on 8-1-2010 on the ground that the said charge sheet has been issued on the basis of preliminary enquiry conducted by respondent No. 4 on a complaint filed by the Sarpanch of Ramnagar Gram Panchayat against whom nearly 13 criminal cases have been registered and investigation is pending.3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been penalized and victimised for conducting investigations against the Sarpanch of village Itoriya who belongs to the ruling party and in such circumstances charge sheet issued being based on an incorrect and biased enquiry report be quashed.4. It is settled that the charge sheet does not give any cause of action to file a petition and can be interfered by this Court in exercise of powers under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of Indi...
Madhya Pradesh Rajya HathkarghA.Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh.
Court: Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur
Decided on: Jul-07-2010
1. Petitioner an association of Madhya Pradesh State Handloom Weavers Corporation has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashment of the orders dated 27.4.2010 whereby keeping in view the continuous loss and the serious financial crisis, respondent No. 4, Madhya Pradesh Rajya Hathkargha Bunkar Society Maryadit has been directed to be wound up in accordance with the provisions stipulated in the Madhya Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The order also reveals that the liberty to bind up the society was also accorded by this Court vide order dated 1.12.2009 passed in W.A. No. 335/2009.2. In W.A. 335/2009: Madhya Pradesh Rajya Hathkargha Bunkar Sahkari Sangh and another v. Ramesh Sahu and others, it was held by their Lordships: "Though the controversy in the present matter was pivoting around the appointment of Mr. K.K. Dubey as Incharge Managing Director but this Court taking into consideration that no Managing Director was appointed for lon...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »