Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
Mohammad Zafar Khan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2012
WP No.13191 o30. 08.2012 Shri S. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Piyush Dharmadhikar, learned Govt. Adv for the respondents. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent Nos.4 and 5 to endORS.the replacement of the vehicle number on his Regular Stage Carriage Permit not SCP-16/RTA/2009. In the couRs.of arguments, I am apprised by the petitioner's counsel that his application in this regard Annexure P-2 is still pending before the aforesaid authorities of the respondent but for the reasons best known to the authorities the same has not been adjudicated till today. In the available circumstances of the case, instead to admit or issuing any notice to the other side the writ petition is disposed of by extending a liberty to the petitioner to file his representation alongwith the certified copy of this order with copy of the writ petition and Annexur...
Ku. Sushila Paraste Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2012
1 Ku. Sushila Paraste versus State W.P.No.13800/2012 30/8/2012: Shri Rajendra Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Joglekar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.1 on advance notice. Petitioner was working as Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Padaria, Janpad Panchayat Narayanganj, District Mandla. Petitioner was suspended and after suspension of the petitioner the charge of Panchayat Secretary was granted to respondent No.4. not his suspension has been revoked and petitioner has been reinstated but as respondent No.4 is not handing over the charge petitioner has filed this writ petition. Petitioner has already filed representation in this regard. Keeping in view the aforesaid, this petition is disposed of with the following directions : It is directed that on the petitioner's filing certified copy of this order respondent No.2 the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Mandla shall look into the grievance of the petitioner with regard to handing over of the ...
Bina Marry David Vs. Lilli Dayal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2012
WP No.9212 o30. 08.2012 Shri Rajendra Singh Chouhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Sharda Dubey, learned PL for respondent No.2. Heard on the question of admission. ORDER (Oral) The petitioner/applicant/plaintiff has filed this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashment of the order dated 21.3.2012, (Ann. P-2) passed by the Ist Additional District Judge, Khurai in Miscellaneous Appeal No.05/11 affirming the order dated 25.3.2011 passed by IIIrd Civil Judge, Class-II, Khurai in MJ.No.4/10 dismissing her application filed under Order 9 Rule 9 of the CPC for restoration of Civil Original Suit No.70- A/09, which was dismissed for want of prosecution on account of not appearance of herself as well as of her counsel, vide order dated 24.6.2010. The petitioner's counsel after taking me through the averments of the petition as well as papers placed on record including the aforesaid order of the ...
Udal Singh Dehariya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2012
W.P.No.13717/2012 30/8/2012 : Shri Anand Chawla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt. Adv.for the respondents. Petitioner is working as a daily wages employee and regularization is claimed on the ground that he has worked continuously since 10.12.1988 on the basis of the Circulars issued by the State Government on 16.5.2007 and 6.9.2008 and the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & ORS.versus Uma Devi & ORS. (2006).SCC 1 for considering the claim of employees for regularization. Keeping in view the aforesaid and taking note of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & ORS.versus Uma Devi & ORS. (2006).SCC 1 for considering the claim of employees for regularization, respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization in the light of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Uma Devi (supra) and decide the claim of the petitioner ...
Mahesh Soni Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2012
Mahesh Soni.versus State & anr. W.P.No.13790/2012 30/08/2012 Shri Rajendra Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner has been transferred from one Patwari Halka to another in the same district. Petitioner is working as a Patwari. Challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on the grounds of personal inconveniences of the petitioner and on the ground that transfer policy has been violated. On such grounds, judicial review of an administrative order of transfer is not permissible. Petitioner is granted liberty to take recourse to the departmental remedies available. As the representation submitted by the petitioner is already pending before the competent authority, the competent authority is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law by a speaking order within a reasonable time. Till then, petitioner shall be permitted to work at his present p...
Lalu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2012
1 Criminal Appeal No.601/2009 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.601/2009 Lalu and another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of counsel for the parties: Shri Rajendra Raghuvanshi, counsel for the appellants. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer the respondent/State. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Delivered on 30th day of August, 2012) The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 13.3.2009 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in S.T. No.40/08, whereby the appellants were convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 324/34 of IPC and sentenced for two years' R.I. with fine of `1000/-. In default of payment of fine, each of them to undergo for...
Ramsurat @ Murra Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2012
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH, JABAPLUR Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K.Gupta,J.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1833 OF 199.Ramsurat alias Marra. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri D.N.Shukla, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/ State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Delivered on the 30th day of August, 2012) This criminal appeal is preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 26/9/1996 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa in ST No.92/1992, whereby the appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sections 333, 448 and 294 of IPC and sentenced for two years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/-, fine amount of Rs.300/- and fine amount of Rs.200/-. The default sentence was directed for 3 months' SI, one month's SI and ...
Ravindra Kumar JaIn Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2012
Ravindra Kumar Jain versus State & ORS.W.P.No.13756/2012 30/08/2012 Shri Jitendra Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner is working as a Revenue Inspector and has been transferred from District-Satna to District-Rewa. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised various grounds challenging the order of transfer. One of the grounds is that the transfer order is issued contrary to the transfer policy. Interference into the order of transfer cannot be made by this Court on the ground of breach of transfer policy. Merely on the ground of breach of transfer policy, judicial review of an administrative order passed is not permissible in view of the law laid down in the cases of Union of India Vs.S.L. Abbas AIR 1993.SC 244.and Shri R.S.Choudhary versus State of M.P.and otheRs.ILR 200.(M. P.) Pg.1397. That apart, petitioner has tried to emphasize that the petitioner is a Revenue Inspector and appointments are made in the District Cadre post and, therefore, transfer is unsustai...
Premlal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2012
Writ Petition No.13392/12. 30.8.2012 Shri Shailendra Verma, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari, learned Govt. Adv.for the State on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioners-plaintiffs have filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for issuing the writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order dated 6.7.2012 (Annexure-P-5) passed by Ist Civil Judge Class-II, Deosar District Singrauli in Civil Suit No.47- A/2004 whereby, their application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC, to add the prayer of declaration to declare them the Bhoomiswami of the disputed land, has been dismissed. After taking me through the papers placed on the record along with averments of the petition and the impugned order petitioners counsel has made his submissions at length for admission and allowing this petition by quashing the impugned order and to allow his application of Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC. In the couRs.of arguments I ...
Ramcharan Lodhi Vs. Imrat Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-30-2012
WP No.12953 o30. 08.2012 Shri K.N.Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Issue notice against admission and IA No.10482/12, an application for grant of stay against further proceeding of the trial court. Necessary steps alongwith requisites of registered post be taken within seven days, failing which this petition shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to the bench. The case be listed on the date so mentioned on the aforesaid notices. Keeping in view the provision of Order 7 Rule 14 (4) of the CPC as an interim measure till next hearing of this petition the further proceeding of the Civil Original Suit No.1-A/09 pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Rehli, district Sagar is hereby stayed. C c as per rules. (U.C.Maheshwari) Judge bks...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »