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.
Satish Kumar Verma Vs. the State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
Writ Petition No.2214/2005 24.8.2012 I.A.No.10876/2012 dated 16.8.2012 has been filed by the proposed interveners Pandit Mukesh Kumar Shastri and Vijay Amlathe to intervene in respect of Durga Temple situated at Madan Mahal, District Jabalpur. They have also filed I.A.No.10877/2012 for grant of six months time to demolish the temple and shift the deity. It is to be noted that on 27.4.2012 the learned counsel for Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, had made a statement in the Court that the temple will positively be demolished within two months. Thereafter on 20.7.2012 the learned counsel again stated that before the next date of hearing, compliance report regarding demolition of the temple shall be submitted. Admittedly, the temple is an unauthorized structure constructed virtually on the middle of road. The proposed interveners were aware of this decision of the Municipal Corporation and yet they did not take any steps despite passing of almost four months. We are convinced that the appl...
Heera Lal Kanojiya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
W.P.No.17817/2010 24.08.2012 Shri D.K.Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari, learned Govt. Advocate for respondent No.1. Shri J.K.Pillai, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. It is contended by respondent No.2 by filing a return that the amount of EPF of the deceased employee is to be distributed amongst the four members of the family, who have obtained a succession certificate from a competent Court. In paragraph 4 of the return, it is categorically stated that 1/4th of the EPF amount each is to be disbursed to the persons named in the succession certificate. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has no dispute in this respect as the succession certificate has been obtained by the petitioner also jointly. This being so, the petition is disposed of with a direction that the respondent No.2 will disbuRs.the amount of EPF to the legal heirs of the deceased employee as reflected in the succession certificate within a month on filing Form No.20. Wi...
Smt. Sita Gautam Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
Smt. Sita Gautam versus State & ORS.W.P.No.12814/2012 24/08/2012 Shri P.K.Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of the order passed on 14.8.2012 in W.P.No.12267/2012(s) (Smt. Savana Dhurve versus State and others) and considering the fact that by the impugned order petitioner is being transferred in place of Smt. Savana Dhurve and as the order of transfer of Smt. Savana Dhurve has been stayed by this Court, pending disposal of her representation, respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner also along with the representation of Smt. Savana Dhurve and pass appropriate order with regard to the same. Till the aforesaid exercise is not completed, petitioner be also permitted to work at her present place of posting. With the aforesaid, petition stands disposed of. Certified Copy as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge nd...
Vinita Kushwah Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
W.P.No.13120/12 (s) 24/08/12 Shri S.R.Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Petitioner is working as an 'Asstt. Teacher'. She was posted in Morena and on a request made by the petitioner, the State Govt. considered the request of the petitioner and vide order Annexure P-4 dated 23/06/12, the Directorate of Public Instructions ordered for transfer of the petitioner from Morena to Janpad Panchayat Maihar in Distt. Satna. Petitioner was relieved from Morena on 12th July, 2012 as is evident from Annexure P-5 and reported to the office of Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Maihar, Distt. Satna but Chief Executive Officer is not permitting the petitioner to join on the post and, therefore, petitioner is before this Court. From the facts that have come on record, it is clear that petitioner is transferred by the State Govt. and the C.E.O. Janpad Panchayat cannot deny joining to the petitioner. Keeping in view the aforesaid,...
Ramavatar Vishwakarma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
W.P.No.13344/2012 (Ramavatar Vishwakarma versus State of M.P.and otheRs.24.08.2012 Heard Shri S.K.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that the respondents/authorities are not taking any action against the respondent No.4 who has forcibly taken over the possession of the part of the petitioner's property in dispute. On an enquiry being made, it is also stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner, that a civil suit is pending before the competent court between the parties. In the circumstances, I do not find any reason to entertain the present petition as the matter regarding possession of the land is seized by the competent court and petitioner has right to obtain an interim order of injunction therein as well as to make a complaint before the court in case of any breach therefof. In the circumstances, I do not find any reason to issue any direction to the respondents/police autho...
Hari Sharan Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
Hari Sharan Singhl versus State & ors.W.P.No.13163/2012 24/08/2012 Ms.Sonali Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Considering the fact that the representation of the petitioner with regard to his cancellation of transfer is pending before the Collector Sidhi, Respondent No.2, for the present without entering into the controveRs.on merit, Collector Sidhi is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Till the aforesaid exercise is not completed, status quo in the matter of working and posting of the petitioner shall be maintained. With the aforesaid, petition stands disposed of. Certified Copy as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge nd...
Mathali Sharan Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
Mathali Sharan Patel versus State & ors.W.P.No.13918/2012(s) 24/08/2012 Shri A.K.Pathak, 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 impugned action proposing to cancel the appointment of the petitioner is taken on the ground that the petitioner was involved in certain criminal case but taking note of the fact that before his termination, petitioner was already acquitted by the trial court in the criminal case vide order dated 18.2.2010, prima-facie, action impugned seems to be unsustainable and inspite of the recommendations made in this regard by the Divisional Forest Officer, Satna, action impugned Annexure-P11 dated 26.7.2012, seems to be unsustainable. In view of the above, further action into the communication dated 26.7.2012 is directed to be stayed and petitioner permitted to work. Certified Copy as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge nd...
Smt.Asha Shukla Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
W.P.No.1351 o24. 08.2012 Shri K.L.Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Adv.for respondent No.1. Shri Sanjeev Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no.2. Heard on IA No.13876/10, this is an application on behalf of the petitioner for early hearing of this petition. For the reasons stated in it, the same is allowed and the petitioner's counsel is directed to make his submission on the question of admission. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the auction proceeding of the house of the petitioner as well the proceeding of confirmation of sale of such house, which is being carried out by the respondent no.2. In the couRs.of arguments in view of provision of Section 17 of the Securitarization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets 2002, in which the alternate remedy to file the appeal is av...
indira Gandhi Mahila Swasahayta Samooh Kudiya (Pawai) Vs. the Chief Ex ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
W.P.No.13109/2012 (Indira Gandhi Mahila Swasahayta Samooth Kudiya versus The Chief Executive Officer Jila Panchayat Sidhi and otheRs.24.08.2012 Heard Shri M.P.Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and stay. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 31.07.2012 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Rewa, Division Rewa in Case No.1167/Appeal/2011-12 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed while that of the respondent No.2 has been partly allowed. The dispute in the present petition relates to allotment of work for supply of Mid-Day-Meal at Primary School Kudiya and Middle School, Kudiya, District Rewa. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in accordance with the policy of the State Government as both the aforesaid schools are situated in the same premises, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be awarded the entire work for supply of Mid-day-Meal to both primary as well as middle school. ...
Mahaveer Singh Gour Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-24-2012
Mahaveer Singh Gaur versus State W.P.No.13129/2012 24/8/2012 : Shri Sameer Seth, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri B.P.Pandey, learned Dy.Govt. Adv.for the respondents. By the impugned order dated 13.7.2012 petitioner has been transferred from the post of Panchayat Secretary in Gram Panchayat Naya Khera, Janpad Panchayat Nivadi District Tikamgarh to Chara. Challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on the ground of breach of transfer policy. On the aforesaid ground judicial review of an administrative order of transfer is not permissible. Keeping in view the aforesaid, without entering into the controveRs.on merits, this petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner and till then petitioner be permitted to work at his present place of posting in Gram Panchayat Naya Khera. Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid. c.c.as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge Mr.mishra...
- ‹ Prev
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- Next ›
- Last »