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.
Ashok Kumar Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No :16404. OF 200.Ashok Kumar Sharma - V/s - State of Madhya Pradesh and Others Present : Honble Shri Justice Rajendra Menon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Adarsh Muni Trivedi, learned Sr. Counsel with Shri S.P.Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned P.L. for Respondent/State. None appears for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4, even though served and represented. ORDER (03/12/2012) This petition is pending since 2007 and even though more than five years have passed, till date reply is not filed by the respondents. On the last date of hearing, time was granted till today for filing the reply and it was clearly stated that if reply is not filed by the next date, the matter shall be heard without granting any further time.2. Even though the case is listed today, name of counsel is reflected in the cause list for the respondents but none is pres...
Govind Singh Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
1 W.P.No.19473/2012 Govind Singh versus Union of India & ORS.03.12.2012 Shri Ahadulla Usmani learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he be granted liberty to take up proceedings for mitigation of his grievance as provided under the CrPC and as has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu versus State of Uttar Pradesh and otheRs.(2008) 2 SCC 40.and Divine Retreat Centre versus State of Kerala and otheRs.(2008) 3 SCC 542. Liberty, as prayed, for is granted. With the aforesaid liberty, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of. C.C as per rules. ( R.S.JHA ) JUDGE mms/-...
Jai Ambe Matsya Udyog Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Madarkha Vs. the State ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
1 W.P.No.17960/2012 Jai Ambe Matsya Uhyog versus State of M.P.& ORS.03.12.2012 Heard Shri K.K.Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat, Nanhi Tehri dated 22.9.2012 pursuant to which the impugned order dated 29.9.2012 has been issued allotting the Madarkha Tank situated in Gram Panchayat, Nanhi Tehri to respondent no.5 for fishing purposes. Admittedly, the resolution of the Gram Panchayat can be assailed before the competent authority as has been held by this Court in the case of Sagar Machhua Sahkari Samiti, Seoni versus Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Seoni & Another, ILR (2008) M.P.1080, and, therefore, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to assail the same before the competent authority in accordance with law. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he...
Ram Prasad Vs. Smt.Natthi Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
W.P No.19316 o03. 12.2012 Shri R. Raghuwanshi, 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.14872/12, an application for grant of stay, on payment of PF alongwith requisites of registered post within three working days, returnable within six weeks be issued to the defendant Nos.1 and 2, 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 Co.No.07-A/12 pending in the court of 4th Civil Judge, Class-I, Sagar is hereby stayed. C c as per rules. (U.C.Maheshwari) Judge bks...
Narendra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
W.P.No.20166/2012 (Narendra versus State of MP and otheRs.03.12.2012 Heard Shri Devesh Khatri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shr P.K.Kourav, learned Dy. A.G.for the State on caveat on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the reservations in the election of the Krishi Upaj Mandi as well as the voter list on the basis of which the election is proposed to be held. It is submitted that the impugned action of the respondents/authorities is contrary to the provisions of the M.P.Krishi Upaj Mandi (Mandi Samiti Ka Nirvachan) Rules, 1997) and therefore be stayed and quashed. The learned Dy. Advocate General appearing for the respondent/State submits that the State has taken up proceedings in accordance with law for making reservations. It is submitted that the State is required to hold and complete the elections of Krishi Upaj Mandi Samities in the State of Madhya Pradesh by 31.12.2012 in view of the orders passed by th...
Kishori Lal Ahirwar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
Kishori Lal Ahirwar versus State of MP and others 03.12.2012. Shri R.K.Tiwari for the petitioner. Shri B.P.Pandey, Deputy Government Advocate, for the State on advance notice. Considering the fact that representation with regard to transfer of the petitioner is pending before the competent authority and certain recommendations have also been made by the Minister of the Department concerned on 5.9.2012, seeking for cancelling/modifying the transfer of the petitioner, for the present without entering into the controveRs.on merits, the competent authority is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 19.11.2012 in accordance to law, by a speaking order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Till the aforesaid exercise is not completed, status quo in the matter of working of the petitioner shall be maintained. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. (RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE Aks/-...
Suresh Prasad Sarathiya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
1 W.A.No.1249/2012 Suresh Prasad Sarathiya State of M.P.& others 3.12.2012 Shri D.S.Chauhan, Counsel for appellant. Shri Kumaresh Pathak, Dy.AG for respondents. This appeal is directed against an order dated 28.9.2012 in W.P.No.16038/2012 by which a writ petition preferred by the appellant against transfer order was dismissed. Learned counsel for appellant at the outset submitted that the appellant may be permitted to file a representation to the Commissioner, Jabalpur who may be directed to decide the representation expeditiously. Prayer made by the appellant is not opposed by Shri Pathak. In view of aforesaid, we dispose of this appeal finally, with following directions:- 1. Appellant may submit a representation against transfer order dated 13.7.2012 to the Commissioner, Jabalpur.2. The Commissioner, Jabalpur on receipt of the representation shall consider and decide it in accordance with law, expeditiously. No order as to costs. C.C.as per rules. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jai...
Dr. Preeti Bagde Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
W.P.NO.13287/2011 03-12-2012. Shri Siddharth Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, for the State/respondent no.1. Shri K.S.Wadhwa, learned counsel for respondent no.2. Shri K.C.Ghildyal, learned counsel for respondent no.3. Matter pertains to selection/appointment of Assistant Professor(History) undertaken by the Higher Education Department. The M.P.Public Service Commission conducted the selection process for various posts in the Higher Education Department, and it is the grievance of the petitioner that respondent no.3 has been selected for appointment as Assistant Professor (History).It is stated that the respondent no.3 has been appointed on a post reserved for a scheduled caste category person from the State of M.P.Emphasizing that respondent no.3 is a scheduled caste person belonging from the State of Maharashtra is not entitled to seek benefit of being Scheduled caste person in the State of M.P.this writ petition has been filed challenging the sele...
Vijay Shankar Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
1 W.P.No.18131/2012 Vijay Shankar Mishra versus State of M.P.& ORS.03.12.2012 Heard Shri Atulanand Awasthy, 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 respondent police authorities to file charge-sheet and prosecute respondent nos.2 to 4. From a perusal of the petition filed by the petitioner, it is apparent that on the complaint of the petitioner, Crime No.184/2012 has been registered by the police at Police Station City Kotwali, Rewa for offences punishable under sections 406 and 420 IPC and the matter is under investigation. In the circumstances, it is apparent that the police authorities have registered the matter and are investigating the same and, therefore, I find no reason to issue any direction to the respondent police authorities, as prayed for. It goes without saying that the police authorities shall take action in accordance with the law and the procedure prescrib...
Smt. Prembai Ahirwar Vs. Kinnar Kamla Chela Suraj Jan Guru
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
W.A.No.1002/2012 Smt.Prembai Ahirwar Kinnar Kamla Chela Suraj Jan Guru and others 3.12.2012 Shri Pranay Choubey, counsel for appellant. Shri Anshuman Singh, counsel for respondent no.1. Shri Siddharth Seth, counsel for respondent no.3. This appeal is directed against the order dated 25.6.2012 passed by the Single Bench in two writ petitions bearing W.P.No.8607/2012 (Smt.Suman versus State of M.P.& otheRs.and W.P.No.8790/2012 (Kinnar Kamla Chela Suraj Jan Guru versus State of M.P.& others).by which the Single Bench has allowed the writ petition and set aside the order of election Commission. The learned Single Bench has directed that till the decision in Civil Revision no fresh election could have been directed for the post of Mayor, Municipal Corporation, Sagar. This order is under challenge in this appeal. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that after notification of election of Mayor, Municipal Corporation, Sagar appellant herein had filed her nomination, but because of the orde...