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.
Ramlal Verma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
WRIT PETITION No.20672/20114. 12.2012 Shri Amit Chaturvedi, learned Counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Vivek Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents-State. Petitioners have filed this writ petition claiming regular pay scale in accordance with the circulars issued by the State Government extending the benefit of regular pay scale to employees who are working in the Work Charged and Contingency Paid Establishment against the sanctioned vacant posts. The question with regard to grant of regular pay scale has been considered by this Court in the case of Nand Kishore Vyas and others versus State of M.P.and another, W.P.No.2533/08(S) decided on 14.12.2009. In the aforesaid case in view of the rejoinder and documents filed, certain orders passed by the Indore Bench of this Court were considered and directions were issued for granting benefit of regular pay scale to the employees working in Neemuch, Jabalpur, Mandsaur and Raisen districts. Grievance of the petitioners is that in certai...
M/S Punjab Stores Vs. the Assistant Commissioner
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
W.P.No.20618/2012 14.12.2012 Shri Mukesh Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, Government Advocate for the respondents. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was levied tax under V.A.T.Act for the period 2009-2010 and as per assessment order dated 11.06.2012, which is on page no.25 of this petition, a total recovery of Rs.1,06,51,669/- has been directed against the petitioner. Petitioner moved an application Annexure P-3 before the respondent No.3 under Section 24-B in Form 29-A of the V.A.T.Act for settlement of the case. The aforesaid application is pending for consideration before the respondent No.3, but during the pendency of the application, coercive action has been initiated against the petitioner for recovery of the aforesaid amount. It it is submitted by the petitioner that till the decision on the application for settlement, no recovery could have been directed, but in spite of this a demand notice Annexure P-4 dated 21.11.2012 has been issued t...
Harshwardhan Upadhyay @ Ashish Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
W.P.No.11986 / 2009 (Harshwardhan Upadhyaya alias Ashish ..Vs..State of M.P.and otheRs.14-12-2012 Shri A.M.Trivedi, learned senior counsel with Shri S.K.Mishra, for the petitioner. Shri S.M.Lal, learned G.A.for the State/respondents. Shri Rajesh Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent No.6. Shri B.P.Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent No.9. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has filed this petition for a direction to the respondent/authorities calling for the record of the case of Crime No.346/2009 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Katni and to direct the police authorities to conduct proper and fair investigation in the matter. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had married one Preeti Mishra but subsequently under the pressure of her relatives, she has lodged the aforesaid criminal case against the petitioner under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(g).344 and 506 of the I.P.C.and the police have registered Crime No...
Deputy General Manager Wcl, Pench Area Vs. General Secretary S.K.M.S.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
W.P.No.13240/2012 14.12.2012 Smt. Indira Nair, learned Senior counsel assisted by Shri Rajas Pohankar, for the petitioner. Shri Brian D' Silva, learned Senior counsel assisted by Shri R.C.Shrivastava, Advocate and Shri Prem Francis, Advocate, for the respondent. The petitioner has filed I.A.No.14271/2012 for linking identical writ petitions with this writ petition and I.A.No.14272/2012 for a direction to deposit the wages payable to the member of the respondent in the High Court and I.A.No.14273/2012 for modification of interim order dated 18.9.2012. The respondent has filed I.A.No.15883/2012 for appropriate directions. Learned senior counsel for the parties are heard on these I.As. This order will dispose of the aforesaid I.As. While entertaining the writ petition on 18.9.2012, this Court has specifically directed the petitioner to comply with the provisions of Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for brevity) and it has been specifical...
Summa Vs. Girja Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
Writ Petition No.19467/2012 14.12.2012 Shri A.L.Patel, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.He is heard on the question of admission. Let notice against admission of this petition as well as IA No.14966/12, returnable within six weeks be issued to the respondents. Necessary steps with requisite of registered post in this regard be taken within working days, failing which this petition shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to the Bench. As an interim measure till next hearing of this petition the further proceeding of C.O.S.No.28-A/2012 pending in the court of Ist Civil Judge, Class-I, Katni is hereby stayed. C c as per rules. (U.C.Maheshwari) Judge bks...
J.Prasad Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
1 Writ Petition No.6190/2007 14.12.2012 Shri Aditya Sanghi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, Govt. Advocate for the respondents. Two Committees were formed, one on 5.7.2008, which was entrusted with the responsibility of going into the problems of bonded labours ignoring those who are mentally challenged and those who are juvenile. Another Committee, formed on 14.8.2008, was inter alia entrusted with the task of rehabilitation of bonded labour. We find that there is no report of the Committees on the record of this case though the Committees were formed in pursuance to the interim orders of this Court dated 16.5.2008. We accordingly direct the Committees to make statement through the Govt. Advocate as to give the exact timeframe within which they will submit their reports. A copy of this order be supplied to Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, Govt. Advocate for necessary compliance. List the matter after two weeks. (S.A.Bobde) (M.C.Garg) Chief Justice Judge HS...
Kamlesh JaIn Vs. Smt. Sangita Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
Writ Petition No.20457/12. 14.12.2012 Shri T.S.Ruprah, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Satish Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing the following reliefs:- A. To issue a writ of Certiorari and whereby, the auction sale dated 28.9.2011 made by the respondent No.1 in favour of the respondent No.3 and in consequence thereof Sale Certificate dated Nil (Annexure-P-9) may kindly be set aside being illegal and contrary to the terms and conditions of the exparte preliminary decree dated 10th March 2000 and also the Order dated 26.6.2012 (Annexure-P-1) passed by the learned Additional District Magistrate Jabalpur in Case No.153/B-121/11-12 (Annexure-P-1).B.To issue a writ of prohibition, whereby the respondents may kindly be restrained for not recovering the time barred amount from the petitioner.C.Any other relief whatsoever this Honble High Court may deem proper and sui...
Shri Krishna Pratap Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR WRIT PETITION NO.15623 of 2012 Krishna Pratap Singh Versus. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors For Petitioner : Shri M.L. Jaiswal, Senior Advocate Assisted by Shri K.K. Goutam, Advocate. For Respondents/ : Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari, Govt. Adv. State ORDER (14.12.2012) Per U. C. Maheshwari J.1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for quashment of the order dated 6.9.2012 (Annexure-P-5 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) in revenue case No.10/A-67/2011- 12 whereby under the provision of Rule 18 (5) of M.P. Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules 2006 (hereinafter in short the Rules 2006), on account of storage of alleged sand (mineral) contrary to the Rules and Regulations, the penalty of Rs.1,57,75,000/- has been imposed on the petitioner. Besides the imposition of penalty and direction of its recovery, the Deputy Director and authorized ...
Rajendra Kumar Kajle Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
Writ Petition No.20502/2012 14/12/2012: Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta , learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt. Adv.for the respondents. Petitioner has filed this petition claiming regular pay scale in view of the Circulars issued by the State Government extending the benefit of regular pay scale to employees who are working in the Work Charged and Contingency Paid Establishment against sanctioned vacant posts. Even though by filing return in similar writ petitions, respondents have tried to contend that petitioners are not entitled for the said benefit but from the facts that have come on record by virtue of rejoinder and documents filed therewith, it is seen that the Indore Bench of this Court vide Order passed on 29.10.2003 in W.P.No.4389/03 following an earlier order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.128/99 (Smt. Savitri Bai versus State of M.P.) directed the State Government to consider the case of employees in the light of directions iss...
Bhopal Hockey Association a Boy Th:i.Rehman Vs. the State of Madhya Pr ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
W.P.No.20727/2012 (Bhopal Hocky Assn. versus State of M.P.& anr.) 14.12.2012 Shri Hemant Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Prashant Singh, learned Addl. Advocate General for the respondent/State. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Advocate General appearing for the State on instructions from the authorities of the State, who are present in the Court submit that by way of an amicable arrangement with the consent of the parties, it be ordered that some members of the petitioner/Bhopal Hockey Association would be permitted to participate in organizing the tournament, that is going to be held on 17.12.2012. The learned counsel for the parties, on consensus, further state that as was done on the previous occasions, a pavilion for accommodating the members of the Bhopal Hockey Association would be made available and that the members of the Association would be given due recognition and respec...
- ‹ Prev
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- Next ›
- Last »