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.
NitIn Kumar Dubey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR Writ Petition No.16894/2011 Nitin Kumar Dubey..Petitioner Versus State of Madhya Pradesh and othersRespondents For the petitioner : Shri Abhishek Gulatee, Advocate. For the respondents: Shri P. K. Kaurav, Deputy Advocate General. ****** Present: HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE AJIT SINGH HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY YADAV ****** ORDER (19.7.2012) The following order of the Court was passed by Ajit Singh, J.By this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for a direction against respondent no.4 Registrar, Rani Durgavati Vishwavidyalaya, Jabalpur, to declare his result of the Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) examination for the academic session 2006-07. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the communication dated 19.12.2008, Annexure P9, issued by respondent no.4 declining to declare his result.2. The petitioner, after passing Higher Secondary and Senior Secondary School Examinations, continued with his educa...
Girwar Singh Mourya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2012
R.P.No.567/2012 19-7-2012 Shri Pushpendra Yadav , learned counsel for the applicant. This application has been filed for recall of an order dated 30.9.2011 passed in W.P.No.16446/2011 (s).It is pointed out by Shri Pushpendra Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant that in the writ petition filed certain factual error has occurred particularly with regard to filing of an earlier writ petition and the order passed therein, as a result the order passed in W.P.No.16446/2011 (s) is apparently erroneous and petitioner wants to get the matter clarified and therefore, he submits that the order dated 30.9.2011 passed in W.P.No.16446/2011 (s) and petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the original writ petition with liberty to file fresh petition clarifying the facts. Accordingly, finding the applicant to have made a fair submission before this Court, this application is allowed. Order passed on 30.9.2011 passed in W.P.No.16446/2011 (s) is recalled. The said writ petition is restored to its or...
Tirath Pd. Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2012
1 Cr.A. No.586/1996 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.586/1996 Tirath Prasad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of counsel for the parties: Shri Sanjeev Saxena, counsel for the appellant. Shri G.S. Thakur, Panel Lawyer the respondent/State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Passed on 19th day of July, 2012) The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 28.2.1996 in S.T. No.152/1994 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdol Link Court Beohari, whereby the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC and sentenced for six years R.I. with fine of `2,000/- failing which the default of sentence of one yea...
Ganendra Pd. Tripathi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2012
R.P.No.502/2012 19.7.2012 Shri N.K.Tiwari, counsel for petitioner. The petitioner seeks review of order dated 2.5.2012 passed in Writ Appeal No.1234/2011 on the ground that in compliance of order dated 6.12.2004 in W.P.No.865/1998, the petitioner herein may be permitted to appear before the Labour Court and the Labour Court may be directed to decide the matter expeditiously. In this review petition, no such directions are required. The Labour Court was bound to comply with the order dated 6.12.2004 in letter and spirit and for this the order dated 2.5.2012 need not be reviewed. The petitioner, if advised so, may move an appropriate application before the Labour Court. With the aforesaid, this review petition is dismissed, with no order as to costs. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain) JUDGE JUDGE M....
Chandra Prakash Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2012
1 Criminal Revision No.865 o19. 7.2012. Shri Vikas Mahawar, learned counsel for petitioner. Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned PL for respondent/State. Heard finally with the consent of counsel for the parties. Perused the record. This is a revision preferred by petitioner Chandra Prakash feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 11.04.07, delivered by Addl. Sessions Judge, Burhanpur in Criminal Appeal No.83/07 by which petitioner has been convicted under Section 25(1-B) B of Arms Act and sentenced to S.I.for one year and fine of Rs.300/-. Judgment dated 5.2.07 delivered by JMFC, Burhanpur in Criminal Case No.654/05 has been confirmed by the learned Appellate Court.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not challenged the finding of conviction of the petitioner but confined his arguments only on the point of sentence. So there is no need to consider the facts of the case.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that earlier petitioner was in jail for a mon...
Phool Singh Parste Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2012
W.P.No.10968/2012 19-7-2012 Shri V.D.S. Chouhan , learned counsel for the petitioner. Issue notice to the respondents on payment of P.F.within one week returnable in four weeks. Inviting my attention to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.9669/2012, Shri V.D.S. Chouhan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Collector of the District concerned is not competent to initiate departmental enquiry in accordance to the provisions of M.P.Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 as the petitioner is a Teacher in the Tribal Welfare Department and Collector is not competent to issue the charge sheet and conduct an enquiry. This argument of the petitioner advanced in W.P.No.9669/2012 was accepted and inter order of stay was granted by this Court on 4.7.2012 but during the couRs.of hearing of this writ petition, Smt. Sharda Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the respondents brought to the notice of this Court a Notification issued by the State Government ...
Smt.Sudha Sandheliya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2012
- ( 1 ) - WP Nos.5938/2008 & 12340/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR W.P.No.5938 of 2008 Smt. Sudha Sandheliya Versus State of M.P. & three others ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri B.P.Sharma, learned counsel for petitioner. Shri S.K.Shrivastava, panel lawyer, for the State/respondents No.1 to 3. None for the respondent No.4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.No.12340 of 2010 Kamla Prasad Chaurasia Versus State of M.P. & three others ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- None for petitioner. S.K.Shrivastava, panel lawyer, for the State/respondents No.1 & 2. Shri Kumaresh Pathak, counsel for the respondent No.3. Smt. Alka Pandya, counsel for the respondent No.4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice R.S.Jha OR...
Suresh Kumar Soni Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No :3420. of 2011 Suresh Kumar Soni - V/s - State of MP and others Present : Honble Shri Justice Rajendra Menon. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri L.S.Singh, Senior Advocate, with Shri J.L.Soni, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Government Advocate, Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Shri Manas Verma, counsel for respondent No.4. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whether approved for reporting: Yes / No.ORDER 19/07/2012 Challenging an order passed by the respondents as contained in Annexure P/1 dated 4.1.2011, terminating the contract appointment of the petitioner on the ground of suppression of fact with regard to a pending criminal case in the attestation and verification form submitted, petitioner has filed this writ petition. 2- Vide order-dated 4.9.2006 Annexure P/4, petitioner was appointed on contra...
Pooran Lal Mehra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
18.07.2012. Shri M.P.Shukla for the petitioner. Ms.Sharda Dubey, Panel Lawyer, for the State/respondents. Petitioner was appointed as a daily rated waterman in the respondents department on 13.7.1984, his appointment was initially for a period of 89 days. It was discontinued and on 17.10.1989 his appointment was made for a period of 89 days. Thereafter, he continued to work but after 17.4.90 no further extension was granted and since 1990 petitioner is not working. It seems that after 1990 petitioner sought for his re-engagement and the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Mandla on 27.4.2012 forwarded the claim of the petitioner for consideration to Chief Medical and Health Officer, Dindori. Interalia contending that the claim of the petitioner for re- engagement has not been considered, petitioner has approached this Court. Shri M.P.Shukla, learned counsel, submits that once the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Mandla has forwarded the claim for consideration to Chief Medical and Healt...
Rajkumar Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
W.P.No.9760 / 2012 (Rajkumar Sharma .versus State of M.P.& otheRs.18-07-2012 Ms.Sudha Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, learned G.A.for the State/respondents. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the fact that the amount relating to supply of mid-day meal is outstanding but the same has not been released to the petitioner till date. It is, however, apparent that the petitioner has approached the C.E.O., Janpad Panchayat, Chhatarpur and the matter is pending before the said authority. In the circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the matter before the competent authority. With the aforesaid liberty/observations the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of. C.C.as per rules. (R.S.Jha) mct Judge...
- ‹ Prev
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- Next ›
- Last »