Madhya Pradesh Court November 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.
Hariom Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
W.P.No.15262/2012 22.11.2012 It is letter petition filed by one social worker Shri Hari Om Shrivastava, Advocate, which has been registered as Public Interest Litigation, as per the order passed by Hon'ble the Chief Justice. Considering the controveRs.involved in this case, we direct Shri Shekhar Sharma, standing counsel for Union of India and Shri Vijay Pandey, Dy.A.G., to take notice in this matter. Office is directed to serve copy of letter petition along with annexures to Sarvashri Sharma and Pandey, within a period of one week. As in the case, petitioner is seeking enforcement of provision as contained in Mental Health Act, 1987, Shri Sharma shall seek instructions from Union of India in respect of the steps taken by the Union of India for enforcement of the aforesaid Act and also what provision has been made by the Union of India for providing finance for enforcement of the provisions of aforesaid Act, because for enforcement of aforesaid provision certain infrastructural facilit...
Bhujbal and anr. Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, PRINCIPAL SEAT, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH PRESENT: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI N. K. GUPTA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.517/2000 Bhujbal and another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh ........................................................................................................... For the appellant no.1: Shri Satish Chaturvedi, Advocate. For the appellant no.2: Shri Narendra Nikhare, Advocate on behalf of Legal Service Authority. For the respondent/State : Shri S. K. Kashyap, Public Prosecutor. ........................................................................................................... JUDGMENT (Delivered on the 22nd day of November, 2012) The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 15.2.2000 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Sehore in ST. No.2/1998 whereby the appellant no.2 is convicted for offence punishable under Section 307 of I.P.C and appellant no.1 is convicted for offence punishable under Section 307 read...
Smt. S. Goyal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
1....W.A.No.1318 of 12 Smt.S.Goyal State of M.P.& otheRs.22.11.2012 Shri V.D.S.Chouhan, Counsel for the appellant. Shri Vivek Agrawal, G.A.for the respondents. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the representation of the appellant against the transfer order was rejected merely on the ground that before consideration of the representation, there was ban on transfer. It is submitted that appellant's mother-in-law is suffering from Cancer and because of this she was required to be posted at nearby place to Balaghat so that in case of emergency she may get treatment in the district hospital. It is further submitted that the appellant is taking care of her mother-in-law and except the appellant there is no other person to take care of her. Stating aforesaid, it was submitted that appellant may be permitted to submit fresh representation to the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Balaghat for her posting at nearby places to Balaghat or at Balaghat. From the perusal of the...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Kamala Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
1 rp. 706/2012 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE A.K. SHRIVASTAVA R.P. No.706/2012 .........Applicants:1. State of Madhya Pradesh through Secretary, Water Resources Department, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal, M.P.2. Collector, Khandwa Cum Ex Officio Deputy Secretary, M.P. Revenue Department, Office of Collector, Khandwa, District Khandwa, M.P.3. Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division, District Khandwa, M.P.4. Sub Divisional Officer Cum Land Acquisition Officer, Khandwa, District Khandwa, M.P. Versus .......Respondents:1. Kamala Bai, W/o Tawar Singh, 2. Naveep Singh, S/o Badri Prasad Gangrade, Both residents of Village Ardala Khurd, Gram Panchayat Pandhana, District Khandwa, M.P.3. Nandaram Bheel, S/o Gokul Bheel (Adiwasi), R/o Jamli Rajgarh, Gram Panchayat Mamli Rajgarh, District Khandwa, M.P. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicants/State by - Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, Advocate Respondents by - S...
M/S Punjab Stores Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
1 W.P.No.17965/2012 M/s Punjab Stores,Katni, Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Katni & others 22.11.2012 Shri Mukesh Agrawal, Counsel for petitioner. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, Govt. Advocate for respondents. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that after filing of the application for settlement under Section 24-B of the M.P.VAT Act, 2002, respondents have issued notice under Section 146 of the M.P.Land Revenue Code for recovery of the amount, while Section 24-C(8) of the M.P.VAT Act provides that after the settlement, no penal action shall be taken against the applicant. It is submitted that respondent No.4 may be directed to decide the aforesaid application expeditiously. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, learned counsel for respondents submitted that within a period of four weeks, aforesaid application would be considered and decided by the respondent No.4 in accordance with law. In an identical matter Writ Petition No.10551/2011 M/s Surjeet Auto Agency versus State of M.P.& others deci...
Ajay Kumar Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2012
W.A.No.211/2012 22.11.2012 None for the appellants. Shri A.P.Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. It is submitted by Shri Singh that the order passed by the Single Bench has been given effect to, so this appeal has become infructuous. It is further submitted that taking advantage of the interim order passed by this Court, the appellants herein are trying to dispossess the respondent No.2. As the counsel of the appellants is not present today, we adjourn hearing of this appeal for 12.12.2012. Till next date of hearing, it is directed that the status quo, as on today, in respect of factual position on the spot be maintained by both the parties. C.C.today. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt. Vimla Jain) Judge Judge psm...
Executive Engineer Madhya Pradesh Grah Nirman Mandal Vs. Smt. Vimla De ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
1 F.A. 585/2012 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE A.K. SHRIVASTAVA F.A. No.585/2012 .........Appellant: Executive Engineer, Madhya Pradesh Grah Nirman Mandal, Project Division, Chhindwara,Through Assistant Engineer, M.P. Grah Nirman Mandal Project, Sub- Division, Seoni District Seoni, M.P. Versus .......Respondents:1. Smt. Vimla Devi, W/o Late Vijaykaran (deceased), Through grand daughter Ku. Anjali, D/o Rajiv Kumar, R/o Sunari Mohalla, Seoni, Tahsil and District Seoni.2. Land Acquisition Officer, for Collector (Land Acquisition) Seoni, District Seoni, M.P. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Appellant by - Shri Rakesh Jain, Advocate Respondents no.1 by - Shri Ravi Ranjan, Advocate Respondent no.2 by - Shri Rahul Jain, Govt. Advocate --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (21/11/2012) The order passed in this appeal shall also govern the disp...
Shailendra Khare Vs. Shri Rajneesh Vaish
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
Shailendra Khare & Anr. versus Rajneesh Vaish and ORS.Con.C.No.1488/2011 21/11/2012 Shri Manot Chansoriya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi with Smt. Gulab K. Patel, learned counsel for Respondents. Inter-alia contending that the claim of the petitioner has not been considered and benefit accruing out of the order passed on 28.2.2011 passed in W.P.No.3849/2011(s) has not been granted, this contempt application has been filed. Petitioner's claim for grant of promotion on the post of Upper Division Teacher (Science) was rejected. Various writ petitions were filed by various similarly situated persons and all the writ petitions were disposed of in the light of an earlier judgment rendered by the State Administrative Tribunal in the case of Indraveer Singh Tomar versus State of M.P.& Others 2004(2) MPHT 3 (NOC).Case of the petitioner was also disposed of in identical terMs.not it is the case of the petitioner that inspite of the directions issued, the claim is not c...
Dwarika Prasad Pandey Vs. Shri Rajneesh Vaish
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
Dwarika Prasad Pandey versus Rajneesh Vaish and ORS.Con.C.No.1485/2011 21/11/2012 Shri Manot Chansoriya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi with Smt. Gulab K. Patel, learned counsel for Respondents. Inter-alia contending that the claim of the petitioner has not been considered and benefit accruing out of the order passed on 31.1.2011 passed in W.P.No.15093/2005(s) has not been granted, this contempt application has been filed. Petitioner's claim for grant of promotion on the post of Upper Division Teacher (Science) was rejected. Various writ petitions were filed by various similarly situated persons and all the writ petitions were disposed of in the light of an earlier judgment rendered by the State Administrative Tribunal in the case of Indraveer Singh Tomar versus State of M.P.& Others 2004(2) MPHT 3 (NOC).Case of the petitioner was also disposed of in identical terMs.not it is the case of the petitioner that inspite of the directions issued, the claim is not co...
Kailash Chandra Soni Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2012
kailash chandra versus state 1 W.P.No.19495/2012 21/11/2012 Shri Vivek Rusia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents on advance notice. Petitioner is working as a Assistant Grade III in the department of Horticulture and Farm Forestry. By the impugned order dated 13.7.2012 petitioner has been transferred from Khandwa to Burhanpur and therefore, challenging the transfer petitioner approached this Court in W.P.No.13401/2012 and on 5.9.2012 the writ petition was disposed of directing the competent authority to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner. not the representation is rejected and therefore, petitioner is again before this Court. Challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on the grounds of personal inconveniences or breach of transfer policy due to working and posting of petitioner's wife. Grounds raised by the petitioner in this writ petition for assailing the transfer order are the breach of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- Next ›
- Last »