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.
Maharashi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vishwavidyalaya Vs. the State of Madhya Pr ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-2012
W.P.No.10593/2012 (Maharshi Mahesh Yogi Vedic Vishwavidyalaya versus State of M.P.& ORS.27.07.2012 Shri Avinash Zargar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Advocate 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 the fact that the respondent authorities are denying the benefit of the Scheme of Post Matric Scholarship to the students belonging to Scheduled Tribes for studying in the petitioner's university and associated institutions. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in a similar petition W.P.No.20994/2011, filed by the petitioner in a case where the respondents had denied the benefit of similar scheme to the Scheduled Caste students, this court by order dated 20.04.2012 had directed the respondents to consider the matter and decide it by a speaking order within a period of one month and communicate the same to the petitione...
Shishupal Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-2012
Criminal Appeal No.2666/2011 27.07.2012 Shri L.N.Sakle, learned counsel for the appellants. Shri A.K.Sharma, learned PL for the respondent-State. Heard on IA No.15293/12, an application on behalf of appellant No.1 explaining the circumstances, in which repeat application IA No.8966/12 has been filed before expiry of period to revive the prayer granted, vide order dated 16.1.2012. For the reasons stated in it, the same is allowed and aforesaid IA No.8966/12 is taken for consideration. Heard on IA No.8966/12, an application filed on behalf of appellant No.1 Shishupal Singh for suspension of his remaining jail sentence and grant of bail as his earlier application in this regard was dismissed as withdrawn, vide order dated 16.1.2012 by extending a liberty to revive the prayer after six months. The present IA appears to be filed under the aforesaid liberty. The appellant No.1 alongwith other Co.accused has been convicted under Section 307/34, 323 and 323/34 of IPC for RI five years with fi...
Mahendra Singh Yadav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-2012
1 Mahendra Singh versus State W.P.No.10309/2012 27/7/2012: Shri Shashank Upadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Swapnil Ganguly, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents. Appointment of the petitioner on the post of Gram Rojgar Sahayak has been quashed by the respondent No.4 by the impugned order dated 14.5.2012 only on the ground that qualification of Diploma in Computer Application obtained by the petitioner from Punjab Technical University is not recognized for the purpose of granting the appointment. The question with regard to the Punjab Technical University establishing study centres and granting Diploma on the basis of undergoing training of the studying Centres has been considered and decided by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.18151/2010 (s) - Developers Institute of Computer Technology and other versus The State of M.P.& Others and the Division Bench has held vide its oder dated 13.9.2011 that the Study Centres related to this University are properly funct...
Santosh Kumar Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-2012
1 W.P.No.10136/2012 27/7/2012: Shri Ashok Chakravarthy, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Swapnil Ganguly, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents. Petitioner is working as a Patwari in District Raisen. Vide order Annexure P/1 dated 31.5.2012 he has been transferred from Raisen to Vidisha and the said order of transfer is challenged mainly on the ground that vide Annexure P/2 petitioner was transferred within the Tahsil by the Sub Divisional Officer and not in the same month within a period a period of 25 days, petitioner is again been transferred. Shri Swapnil Ganguly, learned counsel for the State submits that the power to transfer the petitioner within the district or Tahsil is vested with the Sub Divisional Officer and the power to transfer the petitioner out of district is vested with the State Government. Considering the fact that petitioner has remained at Raisen for a long period, the State Government as per policy has transferred him out of district and the earlier ord...
Ramawatar Verma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-2012
27.07.2012. Shri Praveen Verma for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Government Advocate, for the State. Challenging his proposed termination, petitioner had filed this writ petition. Records indicate that petitioner was working as a Teacher in the Middle School and due to involvement of the petitioner in a criminal case under sections 306 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, he was placed under suspension and during the pendency of the suspension it seems that the petitioner was convicted in the criminal case. Be that as it may be, the petition is only against suspension of the petitioner and the suspension was due to pendency of the criminal case. For the present, it is not proper for this Court to interfere into the matter. However, if the criminal case culminates in an order of acquittal due to which the suspension becomes unsustainable, liberty is granted to the petitioner to submit an appeal/representation to the competent authority and the competent authority is directed to ...
N.K.Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-2012
W.P.No.10604/2012 (N.K.Pandey versus State of M.P.& ORS.27.07.2012 Heard Shri R.K.Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 04.06.2012, by which he has been sent on training, on the ground that the said order is in violation of the circular of the State Government dated 14.09.2007, wherein the authorities have directed that no police personnel above the age of 50 years shall be sent for training as that would amount to wastage of public time and money. Apparently the petitioner has already gone and joined the training and, therefore, the question of staying the operation of the said order and quashing the same at this stage does not arise moreso as the petitioner is 53 years of age and several years of service remain. For the aforesaid reasons the parity as claimed with the petitioner in W.P.No.9061/2012 is also misconceived. However, as the petitioner has raised an i...
Vinod Kumar Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-2012
1 W.P.No.11288/2012 27/07/2012 Shri Praveen Verma , learned counsel for the petitioner. Issue notice to the respondents on payment of P.F within one week, returnable in four weeks. Considering the fact that the petitioner had joined at the present place of posting only in December, 2011 and is being transferred not within a short period of less than 7 months, that also showing him to be transferred at his own request while there is no request made by the petitioner, prima-facie, the order of transfer seems to be unsustainable. In view of the same, the impugned order dated 13.7.2012 transferring of the petitioner from Balaghat to Dindori is directed to be stayed and petitioner permitted to work at the present place of posting at Balaghat. Certified Copy as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge nd 2...
Umesh Raghuwansi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-2012
1 W.P.No.11316/2012 27/07/2012 Shri Rajesh Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Inter-alia contending that an executed order of transfer has been cancelled, petitioner has filed this writ petition. Records indicate that the petitioner is posted as Head Constable in Police Line Harda. According to the petitioner, he was transferred and was posted in Harda only vide order Annexure-P2 dated 16.11.2010, he had joined at Harda only on 8.8.2011 and not by the impugned order Annexure-P4, the order of transfer has been cancelled. Shri Vivek Sharma, learned counsel points out that the Inspector General of Police Harda Zone, who has passed the impugned order as indicated in the order that the transfer order is cancelled as per the policies of transfer contained in G.O.P.No.127/2008 in Clause-4.6 and as Clause-4.6 contemplates that after promotion from the post of Constable to the post of Head Constable, an employee is to work for three years in one district and as he was transferred to ano...
Tulsi Ram Vishwakarma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-2012
1 W.P.No.11242/2012 27/07/2012 Shri Praveen Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner has been transferred from the post of Gramin Udyan Vistar Adhikari Khurai, District-Sagar. Challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on the ground that the petitioner is a heart patient and is suffering from acute heart problems and if the transfer order is implemented, it would adversely effect the petitioner's health. It is submitted that with regard to the same, petitioner has already submitted a representation. Keeping in view the same, for the present without entering into the controveRs.on merit, Respondents are directed to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of one month and till then, status quo, with regard to working and posting of the petitioner be maintained. With the aforesaid, petition stands disposed of. Certified Copy as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge nd 2...
M.P.Housing Board Vs. Ramchandra Mishra
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-27-2012
27.07.2012. Shri M.S.Bhatti for the petitioner. Challenging the award passed by Labour Court, Sagar as contained in Annexure P/4, on 20.3.2007, granting reinstatement without backwages, this writ petition has been filed by the MP Housing Board. Similar award passed by the Labour Court, Sagar was challenged by the petitioner herein in W.P.No.16286/2007 (s) M.P.Housing Board and another versus Shashi Kumar Vishwakarma, and the petition was dismissed by this Court vide order passed on 27.6.2012. In the present case also similar factual position exists. The Labour Court has recorded a finding that the termination amounts to retrenchment and the same having been brought about without following the mandatory provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, therefore, the Labour Court directed for reinstatement without backwages and for the grounds and reasons indicated therein, no case is made out for interference. Accordingly, finding no ground to interfere into the matter for th...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »