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.
Rajendra Kumar Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2012
1....W.A.No.1200 of 12 Rajendra Kumar Sharma State of M.P.& otheRs.12.12.2012 Shri D.K.Tripathi, Counsel for the appellant. Shri Jaideep Singh, Counsel for the respondents again prays for two weeks time to file response to our quarry dated 7.11.2012. Prayer is opposed by the appellant on the ground that on 3.12.2012 such prayer was made and by way of last opportunity, time was allowed till today but no response has been filed. It is submitted that the appellant is running in the age of 58 years and as per the policy of the State Government, if the person is above the age of 48 yeaRs.cannot be posted in the working plan because of hard work. It is also submitted that the aforesaid controveRs.has been settled by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.1320 of 2010 [ State of M.P.& others versus Sudhir Singh and others].in which the Division Bench relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in T.N.Bharadwaj versus State of M.P.& others (Civil Appeal No.6682/05) has held that a person above ...
Madhya Pradesh Warehousing and Logistic Corporation Vs. the State of M ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2012
W.P.No.17851 / 2012 (The Madhya Pradesh Warehousing & Logistics Corporation & others ..Vs..State of M.P.& otheRs.12-12-2012 Shri P.N.Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Arulanand Awasthy, learned counsel for the caveator. Shri S.M.Lal, learned G.A.for the State/respondents. Shri Rajmani Mishra, learned counsel for the intervener. It is pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that the during the pendency of the present petition the petitioners had filed M.C.C.No.1388/2012 seeking clarification of the order dated 13-2-2012 passed in W.P.No.10312/2008 and connected matters and the learned single Judge has allowed the said application filed by the petitioners by order dated 5-12-2012 by passing the orders and issuing the following directions :- When this Court in the original writ petition, on 13.2.2012, directed for determining the rent or the amount of requisition under section 4, it was the intention of this Court that the Collector concerned shall fiRs....
Motilal Chourasia Vs. Registrar Cooperative Societies,
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2012
W.P.No.17190/2012 (Motilal Chourasiya versus Registrar Cooperative Societies and otheRs.12.12.2012 Heard Shri A.K Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to take up proceedings before the competent authority under the provisions of the Cooperative Societies Act or under the provisions of the Food Stuff Distribution order before the competent authority. He however, prays for a direction to the authorities to deal with the complaint of the petitioner expeditiously, in accordance with law, in case he approaches. In the circumstances, while the petition filed by the petitioner is permitted to be withdrawn, it is observed that in case the petitioner approaches the competent authority within three weeks along with a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition, the authority concerned shall look into the complaint of the petitioner, hear all ...
Rameshwar Prasad Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2012
W.P.No.20480/2012 (R.P.Shrivastava versus State of M.P.& ors.) 12.12.2012 Heard Shri Rajendra Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the police authorities are neither informing the petitioner about the steps taken by them in respect of the incident of death of his son on 27.05.2008 not has the petitioner been informed as to the status or conclusion of the investigation pending before them. He, therefore, prays for a direction to the police authorities to take appropriate action and inform him about the same in accordance with law. In the circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2, Superintendent of Police, Bhopal to look into the complaint of the petitioner and take steps expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within a period of one month from the date of furnishing a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of...
Smt. Savita Tripathi Vs. Secretary the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2012
Smt. Savita Tripathi versus State of MP and others 12.12.2012. Smt. Renu Agrawal for the petitioner. Shri B.P.Pandey, Panel Lawyer, for the State. Shri Hemant Sen for respondent No.6. Challenging the orders concurrently passed by the Collector and the Commissioner, holding the petitioner to be ineligible for appointment on the post of Anganwadi Karyakarta, petitioner has filed this writ petition. Petitioner was appointed vide Annexure P/1 dated 5.2.2007 on the post of Anganwadi Karyakarta. The appointment was made in pursuance to an advertisement issued for appointment vide Annexure P/3, on 27.5.2006, and the policy for appointment as contained in the circular Annexure P/4 dated 10.7.2007. Infact in both the circular as well as the advertisement issued, it is clearly stipulated that the age of a candidate shall be determined with reference to the cut-off date fixed as on 1st of January of the year in which the selection is to be done. In the present case, the selection was initiated ...
Suresh Chandra Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2012
W.P.No.18247/2012 12.12.2012 Shri Rajeev Barkur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.K.Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking a direction to the respondent police authorities to take action in accordance with the orders passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sirmour as well as praying for a direction to the Collector, Rewa to issue appropriate directions in the matter. It is stated that the revenue authorities after enquiry had directed the police authorities of police sub-station, Laalgaon to register a case against respondent Nos.4 to 6, but they have not done so and the application filed by the petitioner before the Collector requesting him to look in to the matter is also pending. The learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondent/State submits that the application of the petitioner shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. In view of the aforesai...
Smt. Sarswati Bai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2012
W.P.No.20496/2012 (Smt. Sarswati Bai versus State of MP and otheRs.12.12.2012 Heard Shri A.K.Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction to the police authorities to take action on the petitioner's complaint regarding violation of the interim injunction dated 24.11.2011 passed in Civil Suit No.20A/2011 by the Additional District Judge, Jabalpur in favour of the petitioner. From a perusal of the petition and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner it is evident that there is already an injunction in favour of the petitioner and in respect of violation of the same the petitioner has filed an application under order 39 rule 2(A) of the C.P.C.which is pending decision before the Additional District Judge, Jabalpur in which notices have been issued to the respondents. It is also clear that action taken against the petitioner is pursuant to the decree passed by the 1...
Girdhar Gopal Shiksha Prasar Avam Jan Kalyan Samiti Chhatarpur Vs. Nat ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2012
W.P.No.19664/2012 W.P.No.19666/2012 W.P.No.19667/2012 W.P.No.19671/2012 12.12.2012 Shri Manot Chansoriya, counsel for petitioner. Shri K.K.Singh, counsel for respondent nos.1 & 2. Shri Jaideep Singh, Dy.G.A., for respondent nos.3 & 4. This order shall decide W.P.No.19664/2012, W.P.No.19666/2012,W.P.No.19667/2012 & W.P.No.19671/2012 as the controveRs.involved in all the petitions are same. For the convenience, facts are taken from W.P.No.19664/2012 (Late Pt.Gouri Shankar Sharma Shiksha Prasar Avam Jan Kalyan Samiti, Chhatarpur versus National Council for Teacher Education & others).The petitioner has sought following reliefs in this petition :- (i) It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of certiorari by quashing impugned letters dated 22-03-2012 and 26-06-2012 contained in Annexure P/3 & P/4 and further they may be directed to take further steps in accordance with NCTE Regulation and Hon'ble Court Orders passed in identical cas...
Shailendra Singh Lodhi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2012
Shailendra Singh Lodhi versus State & ORS.W.P.No.2678/2008 12.12.2012 Shri D.K.Dixit, learned counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner has filed this writ petition and has challenged the appointment of Respondent No.6 Smt. Seema Khare on the post of Panchayat Karmi and the subsequent notification issued appointing her as a Panchayat Secretary in Gram Panchayat Budhara, Tahsil-Sihora, District-Jabalpur. A resolution was passed by the Gram Panchayat initially resolving to appoint the petitioner as a Panchayat Karmi but subsequently, the said resolution was withdrawn and Respondent No.6 Smt. Seema Khare was appointed vide order dated 8.1.2008 Annexure- P4 and she was also notified as a Panchayat Secretary vide Annexure- R5. Inter-alia contending that the petitioner has been properly appointed and the act of the respondents in appointing Smt. Seema Khare is unsustainable, this writ petition is filed. The matter is pending since 2008 and from the return filed by the respondents, it is seen th...
Pradeep Kori Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-2012
W.P.No.17675/2012 (Pradeep Kori versus State of M.P.& ors.) 12.12.2012 Heard Ms.Durgesh Thappa, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction for immediate custody of Shreya, 10 months old child of the respondent No.3 and for recovery of dowry amount of Rs.3 lacs, jewelery and other iteMs.It is alleged that the petitioner's niece has been murdered by the respondent No.3, who is her husband and the elder child of the respondent No.3 Priyansu is in the custody of the petitioner, therefore, the relief as prayed for be granted. Apparently the remedy of the petitioner for the relief sought is provided under the separate statutory provisions and the petitioner has to approach the competent court for obtaining the aforesaid reliefs, as this court cannot directly entertain such petition, which requires adjudication on the basis of disputed questions of facts, under Articles 226 and 227 of the C...
- ‹ Prev
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- Next ›
- Last »