Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Sushil @ Bhura Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2012
30.7.2012 Shri Arubendra Singh, Advocate for applicant. Shri Chandrakant Mishra, GA for the State. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.158/12 registered at P.S.GRP, District Satna for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. As per prosecution itself, marg was registered to the effect that deceased Mithun @ Bablu Singh committed suicide on railway track. The offence was registered after 1 years of the incident. Nothing has to be seized from the possession of the applicant. Co-accused Hari Shankar Pandey, Smt. Mithilesh Pandey and Smt. Pooja Pandey have been released on bail by trial Court. Another co-accused Vinay Gautam has been enlarged on anticipatory bail...
Savitri Sahu @ Suparkha Sahu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2012
1 W.P.No.11177/2012 Savitri Sahu @ Suparkha Sahu versus State of M.P.& ORS.30.07.2012 Heard Shri P.R.Bhave, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Manish Soni for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 26.6.2012 by which the respondent no.2 has rejected the preliminary objection filed by the petitioner in the election petition filed by respondent no.4 which has been decided as a preliminary issue on the direction issued by this Court in W.P No.12873/2010 dated 5.7.2011. The brief facts, leading to the filing of the present petition, are that the petitioner was initially elected as member of the Janpad Panchayat, Kusmi, District Sidhi from Ward No.10 as Scheduled Tribe woman candidate. Thereafter, as the post of President of Janpad Panchayat, Kusmi was also reserved for a Scheduled Tribe candidate, the petitioner contested the election and was declared President of the Janpad Panchayat, Kusmi...
Smt. Basanti Soni Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2012
30.7.2012 Shri Vivek Rusia, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Chandrakant Mishra, GA for the State. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicant apprehends her arrest in connection with Crime No.91/2012 registered at P.S.Gohalpur, District Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. She has retired from the post of Asst. Grade II at Public Health Engineering Department. If any extra payment has been made, same may be recovered from her. The applicant is a lady and is a reputed citizen of the locality, in the event of arrest, her reputation will be tarnished, therefore, she be released on anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for State has opposed the application. On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered vi...
Dhal Singh Garde Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2012
1 Dal Singh Garde versus State W.P.No.11276/2012 30/7/2012: Shri N.S.Ruprah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri B.P.Pandey, Dy.Govt.Adv.for the respondents. Petitioner is working as a Deputy Range Officer, Circle Mundiwada, Range Katangi (Territorial).Forest Division, South Balaghat (Territorial) Division, Balaghat and by the impugned order dated 14.7.2012 petitioner has been transferred to another Circle in the same District and challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on the ground that petitioner has 10 months to retire. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record it is seen that petitioner has been transferred from one Circle to another in the same district. On the aforesaid ground canvassed judicial review of an administrative order of transfer is not permissible. Petition is therefore, disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to take recouRs.to the departmental remedies available. (Rajendra Menon) Judge Mrs.mishra...
M. K. Rawat Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2012
W.P.NO.11439/2012(S) 30-07-2012. Shri S.Ganguli, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is working as Agricultural Development Officer in the office of Deputy Director Kishan Kalyan Tatha Krishi Vikas Sagar. By the impugned order dated 20-07-2012 (Annexure P-1).the petitioner has been transferred from Sagar to Damoh. Records indicate that vide Annexure P-3 dated 20-07-2012, the Deputy Director, respondent no.3 has recommended for cancellation of transfer of the petitioner mainly on the ground that no one has been posted in place of the petitioner and 9 assignments as stated in para 5.4 have been given to the petitioner and if the petitioner is relieved the said work would be adversely affected . Keeping in view the aforesaid facts that have come on record, it is directed that on the petitioner's filing a certified copy of this order alongwith copy of Annexure P-3, respondents Nos.1 and 2 shall consider the question of transfer of the petitioner and decide it by a speaking o...
Himmat Singh Parihar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2012
1 W.P.No.11502/2012 Himmat Singh Parihar versus State of M.P.& ORS.30.07.2012 Shri V.K.Shukla learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri V.P.Tiwari, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the respondent/State, on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 4.6.2012 by which the petitioner was directed to attend the two months training programme in Skill Development and Attitudinal Orientation CouRs.at Indore as well as the order dated 27.6.2012 passed by the Incharge, Superintendent of Police, Satna whereby the petitioner has been line attached on account of the fact that he has deliberately not attended the training by taking the excuse of illness. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was infact suffering from illness for which he has filed a medical certificate before the authorities overlooking which the Additional Superintendent of Police, Satna has pas...
Rangnath Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2012
W.P.NO.11361/12 30-07-2012. Ms.Malti Dadaria, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri B.P.Pandey, learned Deputy Govt. Advocate, for the respondents. Challenging the order dated 13-07-2012, by which the petitioner who is working as Multi Purpose Worker Male, Community Health Centre, Jaisinghnagar, District Shahdol is transferred to district Anooppur, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. Challenge to the impugned order of transfer is made mainly on the ground that the petitioner has to undergo some training in Medical College, Jabalpur which will commence since Oct.2012 and if the petitioner is transferred the petitioner would adversely be affected and therefore, the transfer is illegal. That apart no other ground is pointed out on the basis of which interference into the matter can be made. Keeping in view the aforesaid ground raised by the petitioner, it is directed that in case the petitioner has been 2 selected for some training as indicated, the respondents shall ensure th...
Balwant Bhalawi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2012
1 Balwant Bhalawi versus State W.P.No.11735/2012 30/7/2012: Shri Sunil Choubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri B.P.Pandey, Dy.Govt.Adv.for the respondents. Petitioner is working as a Head Master in Middle School, Ghoti, District Chhindwara. By the impugned order dated 13.7.2012 petitioner has been transferred to Government Middle School, Pathai in the same district. Challenge to order of transfer is made mainly on the ground of breach of transfer policy. Merely because the transfer policy is violated, interference into an administrative order of transfer is not called for. Accordingly finding no ground for interference into the matter, petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to take recouRs.to the departmental remedies available. (Rajendra Menon) Judge Mrs.mishra...
Dr. Ranjana Verma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2012
Dr. Ranjana Verma versus State & ORS.Writ Petition No.10907 / 2012 (s) 30.7.2012: Shri Vivek Rusia with Shri Piyush Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri B.P.Pandey, learned Dy. Government Advocate for the State. Petitioner is working as Professor (Botany) in Government Sarojini Naidu Girls College, Bhopal, by the impugned order Annexure P-1 dated 13.7.2012 petitioner has been transferred in the same capacity to Government College, Budni in neighbouring district of Sehore. Challenge to the order of transfer is made merely on the ground that petitioner is guide of three students who are registered for being awarded Ph.D degree and if transfer is affected, the study of students would be adversely effected. That apart, it is stated that there is no post available for joining the petitioner at the transferred post and, therefore, transfer is illegal. Having heard learned counsel for the parties I am of the considered view that on the aforesaid ground judicial review of an admi...
General Manager (Randr) Narmada Hydroelectric Development Corporation ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-30-2012
F.A.No.317/2012 30.7.2012 Shri R.N.Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri A.J.Pawar, Counsel for appellant. Shri Shashank Upadhyaya, Counsel for respondent No.1 to 6. Shri Jaideep Singh, Dy.G.A for respondents No.7 to 9. I.A.No.4878/12 under Section 149 of CPC for extension of time for payment of deficit court-fee. Alongwith the application, the appellant has paid deficit court- fee. Considering aforesaid, prayer made in the application is allowed. Time period for payment of deficit court-fee is extended till 13.4.2012, the date on which deficit court-fee was paid. Admit. Issue notice to the respondents. Notice on behalf of respondent No.1 to 6 is accepted by Shri Upadhyaya and on behalf of respondents No.7 to 9 by Shri Singh, Dy.G.A.Record of the reference Court and Land Acquisition Officer be summoned. I.A.No.3461/12 for stay After hearing both parties, till further ordeRs.following directions are issued:- (i) Appellant to deposit 50% of the awarded amount within a period of...
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »