Madhya Pradesh Court October 2012 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.
Gorelal Vishwakarma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
W.P.No.16516 / 2012 (Gorelal Vishwakarma..Vs...State of M.P.& otheRs.01-10-2012 Heard Shri K.B.Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging inaction on the part of the police authorities. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of the complaint filed by the petitioner against the respondents No.6 to 8, no action has been taken by the police authorities till date against them. In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.4, Superintendent of Police, Jabalpur, to look into the complaint filed by the petitioner and deal with the same expeditiously in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not issued any direction to the police authorities to blindly prosecute the alleged respondents but has only issued a direction to the police authorities to look into the complaint filed by the pet...
Ganesh Prasad Jat Vs. M.P. Profession Examintion Board
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
W.P.No.16048/2012 (Ganesh Prasad versus M.P.Pro. Exam. Board and anr.) 01.10.2012 Heard Shri Lalji Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. Though several issues have been raised in the petition, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petition filed by him be disposed of with a direction to the respondent/Professional Examination Board to consider and decide the petitioner's application (Annexure P-4) under the Right to Information Act, 2005 seeking copies of the answer sheets. In view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner files a copy of the order passed today and a copy of petition before the respondent authorities within 15 days, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the application of the petitioner expeditiously in accordance with law preferably wit...
K.P. Gupta Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
K.P.Gupta versus State of MP and otheRs.01.10.2012. Ku. Malti Dadariya for the petitioner. Shri Amit Sharma, Panel Lawyer, for the State, on advance notice. Petitioner is working as Sub Engineer in the Water Resources Department, District Sidhi and by the impugned order-dated 23.9.2012 Annexure P/1, petitioner has been suspended. Suspension of the petitioner is due to inferior quality of work done by him in the matter of certain construction and finding the petitioner to be negligent in the discharge of his duty, petitioner has been suspended. Petitioner wants this Court to interfere into the matter and the grounds raised for interference are that the allegations levelled against him are not correct, he is not responsible for the inferior quality of construction and on the ground of discrimination and non- consideration of proper reports of inspection submitted by the Chief Engineer, petitioner wants this Court to interfere into the matter. Shri Amit Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer, poin...
Vivek Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
W.P.No.16514 / 2012 (Vivek Tiwari ..Vs...State of M.P.& otheRs.01-10-2012 Heard Shri Prakash Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging inaction on the part of the police authorities. It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of the complaint filed by the petitioner no action has been taken by the police authorities till date against the persons against whom the petitioner has made the complaint. In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.3, Superintendent of Police, Rewa, to look into the complaint filed by the petitioner and deal with the same expeditiously in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not issued any direction to the police authorities to blindly prosecute the alleged accused but has only issued a direction to the police authorities to look into the complaint filed by...
A.K. Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
WRIT PETITION No.13648/20001. 10.2012 Shri S.S.Tripathi, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned Deputy Govt. Advocate, for the respondents-State. Heard on I.A.No.7998/2011, an application for bringing the legal representative of the petitioner on record. It is stated that during pendency of the writ petition, the sole petitioner has died leaving behind the applicant as his legal representative. Since the monetary claims are involved in the writ petition, substitution of legal representative is necessary. Considering the aforesaid, I.A.stands allowed. Let the legal representative of the petitioner be brought on record by making correction in the cause title within seven days. Learned Counsel for the petitioner to examine the return filed by the respondents and if necessary, file a rejoinder in three weeks. List thereafter for consideration. (K.K.Trivedi) Judge Skc...
Shankar Lal Badoliya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, School Edutaion ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
W.P.No.16216/2012 01.10.2012 Shri Sachin Sisodia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for respondents, on advance copy. The petitioner claims grant of regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment. The benefit is claimed by the petitioner in the light of the order passed by the Division Bench at Indore Bench of this Court, in W.A.No.346/2008 (Smt. Usha Ranawat versus State of M.P.and others).dated 18-12-2008. By the aforesaid order passed, more than 25 writ appeals claiming similar benefits were decided and it was directed that the benefit of pay fixation in the regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment shall be made to the petitioners therein. In fact the Division Bench has upheld the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in various cases and while deciding the writ appeals in para-19 the following directions were issued by the Division Bench: 19. In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeal filed by writ petit...
Smt. Shantibai Vs. Western Coalfields Ltd
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
M.C.C.No.1101/20101. 10.2012 Shri Anurag Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant/petitioner. Heard on I.A.No.10791/2012, an application for condonation of delay in filing the M.C.C.for restoration of the writ petition dismissed for non-compliance of peremptory order passed by this Court. Considering the averments made in the application, the same is allowed. The delay in filing the M.C.C.is condoned. It is contended that seven days' time was allowed by this Court to remove the default pointed out by the Registry in W.P.No.8727/2009 vide order dated 24.09.2009 and it was made clear that in case default is not removed, the petition shall stand dismissed without reference to the Court. However, the default pointed out by the Registry was not removed on account of oversight and, therefore, the writ petition has been dismissed because of peremptory order. It is contended that an opportunity may be granted to the applicant/petitioner to remove the default pointed out by the Registry in the ...
Gulab Singh Madavi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
1 W.P.No.15978/12 1/10/12 Shri Maninder S. Bhatti, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Dharmadhikari, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Petitioner is working as a 'Upper Division Teacher' in Govt. Boys Middle School, Sonpuri, Vikas Khand Baihar, Distt. Balaghat. Vide order dated 13/07/12, petitioner was transferred to Higher Secondary School, Garhi in the same Tahsil Baihar, Distt. Balaghat. It was the case of the petitioner that certain duties pertaining to the election have been entrusted to the petitioner. While so working, he was transferred by the impugned order, the said transfer being illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Representation of Peoples Act, petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ petition. The said case was registered as W.P.No.11223/12 (s) Gulab Singh Madavi versus State of M.P.and others and after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State, this Court on 26/07/12 vide Annexure P-9 found that on the grounds raised w...
ishwarlal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
W.P.No.16492/2012 (Ishwarlal versus State of MP and otheRs.01.10.2012 Heard Shri Nishant Datt, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging inaction on the part of the police authorities on the complaint filed by him regarding the false caste certificate obtained by the respondents No.9 and 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the police authorities. It is however, observed that the appropriate remedy of the petitioner is to approach the High Power Committee constituted pursuant to the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the Case of Ku. Madhuri Patil versus Additional Commissioner Tribal Development AIR 199.SC 9.for mitigation of his grievance against the issuance of false caste certificate to the respondents No.9 and 10. The petition filed by the petitioner is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the High Power Committee fo...
Mrs.ismat Fatmi Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2012
W.P.No.8386/2008 (MRS.Ismat Fatmi versus State Bank of India and another) 01.10.2012 Shri B.D.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Ashish Shroti, learned counsel for the respondents/Bank. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner undertakes to clear the entire liability outstanding in her name within three months and also undertakes to make payment to the respondent/Bank in instalments within this period. It is submitted that in view of the aforesaid undertaking, the impugned notice issued under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ( for short the Act.) dated 08.05.2008, paper publication regarding auction dated 15.06.2008 be quashed. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Bank is only concerned with the liability and in case the petitioner discharges the same, they would withdraw the impugned notice. It is however, submitted that in case the petit...
- ‹ Prev
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 108
- 109
- Next ›
- Last »