Madhya Pradesh Court December 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.
Ram Khelawan Jayaswal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
W.P.No.20672/2011 14.12.2012: Shri Mukesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt. Adv.for the respondents State. Shri S.D.Shukla, learned counsel for respondent No.7. Challenge in this writ petition is made to concurrent orders passed by the Additional Commissioner and the Collector on 17.8.2011 and 10.9.2007 respectively by which claim of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Guruji has been rejected. Petitioner was a candidate who had submitted his application for appointment on the post of Guruji. However, it was found that petitioner on 15.9.2001 when the application was filed already holding the post of an elected Panch of the Gram Panchayat and therefore, he could not be appointed. Petitioner has submitted that he has resigned from the post and therefore, he was eligible but the petitioner was not appointed and the matter traveled to the Collector and Commissioner. The Collector and the Commissioner have found that petitioner wa...
Kalyan Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
1 M.Cr.C.No.13595/12 14.12.2012. Applicants Kalyan Singh, Prahlad Singh and Smt. Krishna Bai are present in person along with their counsel Shri Narendra Nikhare. Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, PL for State/non- applicant no.1. Smt. Bhagwati Bai alias Guddi /respondent no.2 is also present in person along with her counsel Shri Dinesh Tiwari. Parties have been identified by their respective counsel. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.in order to invoke the extra ordinary powers of this Court for quashing the Criminal Case No.190/10 pending before ACJM, Bareli for alleged offence punishable under Sections 498-A IPC and 3/4of Dowry Prohibition Act as compromise has been entered into between the parties. It is submitted that Crime No.263/05 was registered by PS-Bareli for offence punishable under Section498. A,34,506 ,323 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. It is submitted that compromise has been partially allowed in the aforesaid criminal case in relation to offenc...
M.P.Rajya Sahkari Vipanan Sangh Maryadit Vs. A.H. Siddiqui
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
1....M.C.C.No.1335 of 2012 M.P.Rajya Sahkari Vipran Sangh A.H.Siddiqui 14.12.2012 Shri Abhijeet Bhoumik, Counsel for the applicant. This application is filed seeking extension of time for compliance of order dated 13.12.2011 which was passed in W.P.841 of 2001. It is submitted that because of not availability of the record, the order could not be complied till date and prays for further 90 days time to trace out the record and to comply with the order of this Court. By order dated 13.12.2011, this Court directed thus :- Petitioner is claiming reimbursement of his medical bill which has not been cleared till date. From perusal of the file, it appears that the petitioner had suffered heart ailment and because of this he visited Nagpur and Bombay Hospitals for the surgery and treatment of which bills were submitted to the respondents,but, these have not been paid. Prayer of the petitioner is that the respondents be directed to make the payment of the aforesaid medical bills. The controveR...
Smt. Uma Dubey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
W.P.No.20846/2012 14/12/2012 Shri Vipin Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State. Heard. The grievance of the petitioners are that inspite of orders passed under similar circumstances in the case of an employee Surendra Kumar Gupta, similar treatment is denied to the petitioneRs.Petitioners claim grant of appointment on the post of Lab Assistants in accordance with the circulars and policy of the State Government and brings to the notice of this Court an order dated 14.10.2008 passed in W.P.No.19116/2003 (Annexure-P4) in which initially in the case of one Shri Surendra Kumar Gupta, certain directions were issued by this Court and subsequently in Contempt Petition No.1090/2009, certain orders were passed on 16.5.2012 (Annexure-P6) and in pursuant thereto relief was granted to Surendra Kumar Gupta vide order (Annexure-P7).petitioners claim similar benefit. Keeping in view the aforesaid grounds raised by the petit...
Rajendra Kumar Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
1 W.P.No.20596 o14. 12.2012 Shri Ajay Kumar Shukla, counsel for the petitioner. Smt Sharda Dubey, PL for the respondent. Petitioner, a villager has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the order No.1981/Reader-3/Grain/2012 dated 21.8.12 (Annex.P/11) issued by respondent No.3 SDO (Revenue) Panna, whereby inspite making complaint by the petitioner and other villagers against respondent No.4 he has been permitted to operate and run the AdaRs.Mahila Bahudeshia Samiti, Hada, Panna fair price shop for distributing the food grain and kerosene. In the couRs.of the arguments on admission, I am apprised by the petitioner's counsel that the aforesaid impugned order Annex.P/11 is subjudice in the appeal No.02/ appeal/11-12 before the Collector Panna at the instance of the petitioner under the provision of concerning order of 2009 promulgated by the State of M.P.He also said that for one reason or another, the same is not being heard and decided by the...
Smt. Kushum Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
Writ Petition No.20830/2012 Smt. Kushum Sharma versus State of MP and others 14.12.2012. Shri S.P.Pandey for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Government Advocate, for the respondents on advance notice. Challenging an order-dated 1.12.2012 Annexure P/1, passed by respondent No.4 District Education Officer, Katni, petitioner has filed this writ petition. Late Ashok Kumar Sharma was working as a Peon in the Department and holding the petitioner to be his legally wedded wife, it seems that compassionate appointment was granted to the petitioner. However, another person namely Ku. Pooja Sharma, claiming herself to be daughter of Late Ashok Kumar Sharma, initiated proceedings before the Court of 3rd Civil Judge Class I, Bhopal for succession and grant of certain benefits to her. One of the issues framed in the succession proceedings was with regard to claim of Ku. Pooja Sharma, as the daughter of Late Ashok Kumar Sharma and the right of the petitioner. Petitioner was also a party in this...
Ku. Deepika Patel Vs. Board of Secondrary Education
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
W.P.No.10849/2012 (Ku. Deepika Patel versus Board of Sec. Education) 14.12.2012 Shri Vinot Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent/State. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for revaluation of her answer sheets in the subjects of English, Hindi and Social Science in the Xth Board Examination, held by the respondent/Board for the year 2011-12. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner should have been awarded 85 marks instead of 78 marks in English, 93 marks instead of 87 marks in Hindi and 86 instead of 76 in Social Science but the respondent authorities have wrongly examined and evaluated the answer sheets of the petitioner in the aforesaid subjects. In the circumstances, it is submitted that the respondent authorities be directed to revaluate the answer sheet of the petitioner and award her marks as stated above. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Board per contr...
Ram Bai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
W.P.No.20944/2012 (Ram Bai versus State of MP and otheRs.14.12.2012 Heard Shri Sanjay Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 20.11.2012 passed by the Commissioner, Jabalpur Division Jabalpur whereby the interim order of stay granted by the Collector dated 25.09.2012 has been affirmed and the revision has been dismissed. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the S.D.O.has passed an order of removal of the petitioner who is the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Ramtila Janpad Panchayat Bijadand District Mandla against which the petitioner has filed an appeal before the Collector which is pending decision. It is stated that in the said appeal the petitioner had filed an application for stay of order of his removal but the collector by order dated 25.09.2012 has passed an order staying the recovery part only and has not stayed his removal. It is stated...
Ajay Prasad Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
W.P.No.20572/2012 14.12.2012 Shri Ashok Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for respondents, on advance copy. It appears that certain litigation was brought before this Court, pursuance to which orders were issued by this Court for taking back the persons like petitioners in service. The Sub Divisional Officer, Public Works Department Sub-division Mauganj, District Rewa, has directed reinstatement of petitioner but the Sub Engineer working under him has not complied with the said order though the joining is given by the petitioner. It is further contended that the petitioner is made to work, but he has not been paid the salary. In view of the aforesaid, without entering into the merits of the writ petition, the Sub Divisional Officer is directed to see that his order is complied in full with respect to reinstatement and payment of wages to the petitioner. The aforesaid compliance be done within a month from the date of receipt of ce...
Alp Sankhyak Mahila Prathmik Upbhokta Sahkari Bhandar Maryadit Chhatar ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
1 W.P.No.4246 o14. 12.2012 Shri Yash Soni, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Lalit Joglekar, PL for the respondent No.1 to 4. Shri Bhupesh Tiwaria, Advocate has given appearance on behalf of respondent No.5. He is directed to file his Vakalatnama within 15 days in the present matter. Subject to such compliance he is permitted to appear in this matter. Heard on the question of admission. Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the order dated 7.3.12 (Annex.P/4) passed by respondent No.4 District Supply Officer whereby the allotment of the fair price shop to the petitioner vide order dated 19.1.12, has been canceled. Initially, after taking me through the papers along with the impugned order petitioner's counsel argued the case at length for admission and allowing this petition but in view of the provision of Clause 11 of the Madhya Pradesh Public Distribution System (Control) Order 2009 providing statutory appeal against the impu...