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.
Meenal JaIn Vs. Madhya Pradesh Board of Secondary Education ,
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2012
W.P.No.19416/2012 (Meenal Jain versus M.P.Board of Secondary Education) 21.12.2012 Shri Pratyush Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent/Board on advance copy. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a brilliant student, who has been denied the achievement of having passed her Higher Secondary School Certificate Examination with 90% marks on account of faulty valuation of answer sheets in the subject of Mathematics. It is stated that the petitioner has been awarded 93 marks out of 100, though she was entitled to get 97 marks, as the answer given by her in question No.11 has wrongly been scored out. In the circumstances, the petitioner prays for revaluation of answer sheets in the subject of Mathematics. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Board per contra submits that there is no provision for revaluation in the regulations of the respondent/Board, therefore the petition filed by...
M/S Lafarge India Pvt.Ltd. O Atul Vihar Wright Town Jabalpur Vs. the S ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2012
W.P.No.21057/2012 21.12.2012 Shri A.K.Shrivastava, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Agrawal, Government Advocate for the respondents. The petitioner has sought following reliefs:- (i) To call for the case record. (ii) To hold that the petitioner is entitled to exemption from commercial tax on sale of cement in residuary State of Madhya Pradesh manufactured in its cement manufacturing plant at Sonadih. Falling in bifurcated State of Chhattisgarh. (iii) To issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order of assessment (Annexure P-3) and the order in revision (Annexure P-4).(iv) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to grant exemption from payment of tax during the period of eligibility i.e.upto 30-09-2004 under the eligibility certificate granted to it. (v) Any other suitable relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted together with the cost of this petition."It is submitted by the petitioner that the controveRs.involved in ...
Uma Shankar Tiwari Vs. Vivek Agrawal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2012
Cont. Case No :385. 2011 Uma Shankar Tiwari versus Shri Vivek Agrawal and otheRs.21.12.2012. Shri Sanjay Verma for the applicant. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, Government Advocate, for the non- applicants. Keeping in view the order passed by the non-applicants as contained in Annexures R/1 and r/2, for the present without proceeding any further in the matter, non-applicants are directed to ensure that the actual monetary benefits accruing to the applicant out of the aforesaid ordeRs.are paid to him, if not already done, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, for the present without initiating any action for contempt, the non-applicants are discharged from the proceedings and the application disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. (RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE Aks/-...
R.K. Choudhary Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2012
1 W.A.No.1409/2012 R.K.Choudhary State of M.P.& others 21.12.2012 Shri S.P.Khare, Counsel for appellant. Shri Vivek Agrawal, Govt. Advocate for respondents. This appeal is directed against an order dated 23.11.2012 in W.P.No.19147/2012 by which a writ petition preferred by the appellant against an order rejecting the representation filed in compliance of the earlier order by the writ Court in W.P.No.13812/2012 dated 3.9.2012, was dismissed. Learned Single Judge has found that on the basis of some provision in the transfer policy, transfer order cannot be interfered. Learned counsel for appellant submits that the representation was rejected without a speaking order, so the writ Court ought to have interfered in the matter and could have directed the authority to decide the representation afresh. From the perusal of the record, we find that it was second round of litigation. Earlier, against transfer order Annexure P/2 dated 11.7.2012 by which the appellant was transferred from Mandla to...
Kamal Kishore Gulati Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2012
1 W.A.No.1414/2012 Kamal Kishore Gulati State of M.P.& others 21.12.2012 Shri N.S.Ruprah, Counsel for appellants. Shri Vivek Agrawal, Govt. Advocate for respondents. Considering the contentions made by Shri Ruprah, learned counsel for appellants, we directed Shri Vivek Agrawal, learned GA to seek instructions from the respondents and to apprise this Court in respect of factual position. Ad interim writ Learned counsel for appellants submitted that it is alleged against the son of appellants No.1 and 2 namely Sachin Gulati that he has run away alongwith Durga Bai daughter of Khemchand and an offence under Sections 363, 366 read with Sections 3(1)(xii) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been registered against Sachin Gulati, but the police are harassing the appellants and on several occasions, appellants have been interrogated by the police. not the police are making investigation during mid-night even from the appellant No.2. It i...
Bhairo Singh Yadav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2012
M.C.C.No.1045/2012 21.12.2012 Heard Shri K.L.Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri B.D.Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 on the application for restoration of W.P.No.7958/09. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant as the applicant had taken the file and not from him for appointing the new counsel he could not attend the hearing of the case which resulted in dismissal of the writ petition for want of prosecution. The application is supported by an affidavit of the applicant and as the reasons stated therein appear to be bona fide, the application for restoration is allowed. The impugned order dated 24.07.12 passed in W.P.No.7958/09 is recalled and the aforesaid writ petition is directed to be restored to its original number . M.C.C.stands allowed accordingly. A copy of this order be placed in the record of W.P.No.7958/09. C.C.as per rules. (R.S.Jha) Judge msp...
Shailendra Narayan Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2012
W.P.No.21529/2012 21/12/2012 Smt. Sudha Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the respondents, on advance notice. Heard. In this writ petition, the petitioner inter-alia seeks a direction to the respondents to declare the petitioner qualified in the test which was held for appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner holds D.Ed. Degree and, therefore, he is entitled to 20 marks under the rules namely Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Samvida Shala Shikshak (Employment & Conditions of Contract Rules, 2005. However, the petitioner is not awarded 20 marks. It is further submitted that the petitioner be granted liberty to submit a representation to the competent authority with regard to his grievance and the writ petition be disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation which may be submitted by the petiti...
Devendra Kumar Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2012
W.P.No.20893/2012 21/12/2012 Shri Sanjayram Tamrakar, learned counsel for the petitioners Shri Ved Prakash Tiwari, learned Panel Lawyer for respondents State Government. Petitioners in this writ petition have prayed for the relief on the parity with the Government Teacher. Petitioners are working as employees in the Government aided Institution. Petitioners have claimed the benefit of directing the respondents to ensure full payment of salary. Further direction is sought to give benefit of 5 th Pay Commission w.e.f.1.1.1996 and the same rate of Dearness Allowance and House Rent Allowance. Matter has been dealt with by this Court in number of decisions and direction has been issued to the respondents to give the benefit of the similar pay scale at par with the corresponding categories of employees in the Government schools. The school in question is affiliated to the Board of Secondary Education. The Regulation 73 of Board of Secondary Education reads as under :- Regulation 73 : The sca...
The Nagpur Dioceasan Trust Association Vs. the Municipal Corporation J ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2012
W.P.No.21493/2012 (Nagpur Diocesan Trust versus Municipal Corporation & anr.) 21.12.2012 Shri Akash Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Pradeep Singh, learned counsel for the respondent/Corporation. On directions by this Court, the learned counsel for the respondent/Corporation has sought instructions from the Corporation and on that basis submit that in case the petitioners have deposited the requisite fees, documents etc., their application seeking sanction of the map would be considered by the respondent/Corporation in accordance with law, within two weeks. In view of the aforesaid statement of the learned counsel for the respondents, the petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of in terms thereof to enable the respondent No.2 to take steps in accordance with the statement made by them before this court. To enable the authorities to do so, a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition be served upon them by the petitioneRs.It is made clear t...
Suresh Khangar and anr. Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-21-2012
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH, JABAPLUR Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.K.Gupta,J.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1542 OF 199.Suresh Khangar. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Masood Ali, Advocate for the appellant. Shri S.K.Kashyap, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/ State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Delivered on the 21st day of December, 2012) This criminal appeal is preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 7/7/1997 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khurai District Sagar in ST No.226/1996, whereby the appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 304 (Part- II) of IPC and sentenced for three years' rigorous imprisonment.2. During the pendency of this appeal the appellant Ghambir has expired, and therefore his name was deleted from the cause title of the app...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »