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.
Smt.Sadhna Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
Smt. Sadhna Singh versus State W.P.No.13177/2012 27/8/2012 : Petitioner in person. Having heard the petitioner it is seen that an appeal filed by the petitioner in the matter of appointment to the post of Aanganwadi Karyakarta is pending before the Collector, District Rewa since 2010 and it is the grievance of the petitioner that the appeal has not being decided. Keeping in view the aforesaid, it is directed that appeal filed by the petitioner as contained in Annexure P/2 dated 15.12.2010 be decided by the Collector, Rewa after hearing all concern in accordance to law within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. c.c.as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge Mr.mishra...
M/S Sai Fuels Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
W.P.No.13532 o27. 08.12 Petitioner Abhishek Trivedi, present in person. None for respondent No.1 Bharat Petroleum Corporation of India, the caveator although represented through duly engaged counsel. On call of the State Bar Council, the Advocates are abstained from work but the petitioner present in person wants to argue the matter, hence the petition is taken-up for hearing. In the couRs.of argument on admission, I am apprised by the petitioner that subsequent to filing this petition his alleged dealership of the outlet has been terminated by respondent No.1 on 24.8.2012 for which the notice was received by him on dated 25.8.12, on which, he has filed IA No.11345/12 an application for amendment of this petition so also IA No.11344/12 for grant of stay against the termination order. At this stage, on receiving the aforesaid IAs from the office, the same are placed before me by the Reader. It is undisputed fact that in the present petition no averments regarding termination of the outl...
Shiv Shankar Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH, JABAPLUR Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K.Gupta,J.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2072 OF 199.Shiv Shankar. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Manish Mishra, Advocate for the appellant. Shri G.S.Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/ State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Delivered on the 27th day of August, 2012) This criminal appeal is preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 1/11/1996 passed by the Special Judge under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short Special Act.) Mandla in Special Case No.51/1996, whereby the appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sections 323, 451, 354 of IPC read with Section 3(1)(xi) of the Special Act, 1989 and sentenced for one month's simple imprisonment, six months' rigorous imprisonment with ...
Phool Singh Parihar Vs. Rent Controlling Authority Jabalpur
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
1 Writ Petition No.13199/2012. 27.8.2012 Petitioner Phool Singh Parihar, is present in person. On call of the State Bar Council the advocates are restrained from work, hence the petitioner is present in person and prays for hearing of this petition today. He is heard on the question of admission. The petitioner a retired person has filed this petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ directing the respondent No.1, Rent Controlling Authority, Jabalpur to decide his pending case No.32-A/90(7)/2011 within a period of six weeks. As per averments of the petition the petitioner has filed some proceeding under Section 23-A of M.P.Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for short the Act.) for eviction of respondent No.2 and 3 from his premises as he has in bonafide genuine requirement of the same for which he does not have any other alternate accommodation in the city of Jabalpur. Having heard the petitioner in person, in the available scenario of the case and ...
Shri Girdhar Sahare Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
W.P.No.12594/2012 27.08.2012 Lawyers are abstaining the work. Perused the record. Petitioners are challenging an action of the respondents in denying the benefit of second Kramonnati and proposing to make recovery of benefit already granted, the question involved in this petition already decided by a Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne versus State of M.P.and others in W.P.No.6773/2006, decided on 26.04.2007, and subsequently followed by this Court in series of cases, one such order being W.P.No.5756/2008 (s).Shri R.C.Chaurasiya and others versus State of M.P.and otheRs.decided on 26.05.2008. In the case of Smt. Prerna (supra) the directions given is as under. 17. Consequently these petitions are allowed. The petitioners are entitled to derive the benefit of second Kramonnati according to the terms and conditions mentioned in the circular dated 21/03/1983 19/4/1999, 02/11/2001 and 03/09/2005. Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of with the follo...
Shakir Bux Siddiqui Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
W.A.No.960/2012 27.08.2012 Appellant Shakir Bux Siddiqui present in person. None for respondents. This appeal is directed against an order dated 14.08.2012 in W.P.No.12174/2012(S) by which writ petition preferred by appellant against the transfer order dated 14.07.2012, transferring appellant, who is a Moharair, from Nagar Palika, Teonthar, District Rewa to Nagar Palika, Umariya on the same post, was dismissed. The learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition permitted appellant to file a representation against the transfer order within a period of one week and the authority was directed to decide the representation within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. Appellant, who is present in Court, has submitted that he is a heart patient and has already suffered an attack. Earlier, he was referred from Medical College, Rewa to Lucknot for his treatment and a surgery has been advised, but because of paucity of the funds, surgery could not be per...
Sevak Ram Desmukh Vs. Secretary the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
Sevak Ram Deshmukh versus State W.P.No.13202/2012 27/8/2012 : Petitioner in person. Petitioner is working as a Teacher in Government Primary School Danaura, District Seoni. By the impugned order dated 13.7.2012 petitioner has been transferred from the said school to another in the same Block and District Seoni. Challenge to the order of transfer is made on the ground of personal inconveniences. In transferring the petitioner no statutory rules or regulations are shown to be violated not any malafide made out. That being so, it is not a fit case where judicial review of an administrative order can be made by this Court. Accordingly, finding no case for interference, this petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to take recouRs.to the departmental remedy of representation available. Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid. (Rajendra Menon) Judge Mr.mishra...
Rameshwar Prasad Badoniya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, School Educ ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
Rameshwar Prasad Badmiya versus State W.P.No.13265/2012 27/8/2012 : Petitioner in person. Petitioner is working as a Principal (High School) in Government Higher Secondary School, Kanti, District Damoh. By the impugned order dated 15.7.2012 petitioner has been transferred from the said school to Govt. High School Bilai, District Damoh. Challenge to the order of transfer is made on the ground of personal inconveniences of the petitioner due to various ailment. In transferring the petitioner no statutory rules or regulations are shown to be violated not any malafide made out. That being so, it is not a fit case where judicial review of an administrative order can be made by this Court. Accordingly, finding no case for interference, this petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to take recouRs.to the departmental remedy of representation available. Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid. (Rajendra Menon) Judge Mr.mishra...
Ravikrishna Upadhyay Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
W.P.No.11148/2012 27.08.2012 Lawyers are abstaining the work. Perused the record. The petitioner claims grant of regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment. The benefit is claimed by the petitioner in the light of the order passed by the Division Bench at Indore Bench of this Court, in W.A.No.346/2008 (Smt. Usha Ranawat versus State of M.P.and others).dated 18-12-2008. By the aforesaid order passed, more than 25 writ appeals claiming similar benefits were decided and it was directed that the benefit of pay fixation in the regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment shall be made to the petitioners therein. In fact the Division Bench has upheld the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in various cases and while deciding the writ appeals in para-19 the following directions were issued by the Division Bench: 19. In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeal filed by writ petitions succeeds and is allowed whereas writ appeals filed by the State are dismissed i...
Smt. Rajendra Kumari Chaturvedi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-27-2012
W.P.No.12454/2012 27.08.2012 Lawyers are abstaining the work. Perused the record. Petitioners are challenging an action of the respondents in denying the benefit of second Kramonnati and proposing to make recovery of benefit already granted, the question involved in this petition already decided by a Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne versus State of M.P.and others in W.P.No.6773/2006, decided on 26.04.2007, and subsequently followed by this Court in series of cases, one such order being W.P.No.5756/2008 (s).Shri R.C.Chaurasiya and others versus State of M.P.and otheRs.decided on 26.05.2008. In the case of Smt. Prerna (supra) the directions given is as under. 17. Consequently these petitions are allowed. The petitioners are entitled to derive the benefit of second Kramonnati according to the terms and conditions mentioned in the circular dated 21/03/1983 19/4/1999, 02/11/2001 and 03/09/2005. Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of with the follo...
- ‹ Prev
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- Next ›
- Last »