Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dr. R.B.Dubey
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2012
1 Writ Appeal No.999/20103. 09.2012 Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, Govt. Advocate for the appellants. Respondent in person. The controveRs.involved in this appeal is very short that the respondent was not entitled for voluntary retirement under Rule 42(1)(a) of the M.P.Civil Services Pension Rules, 1976, as he had not completed qualifying service of 20 yeaRs.It is submitted that during the period between 1.8.1980 and 18.9.1986, the respondent was working on adhoc basis. On 18.9.1986 the services of the respondent were regularised and for the purposes of counting period for pension, the services rendered by the respondent after 18.9.1986 could have been counted and if the aforesaid prior period is not counted then till 10.5.2003 re- spondent had not completed 20 years of qualifying service so he was not entitled for voluntary retirement or for pension. The respondent who is appearing in person submitted that the aforesaid period was treated as a regular service, the applica- tion of the respond...
Kashi Bai Vs. Poona Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2012
FA No.184 o3. 8.2012. Shri R.K.Verma for the appellant. Shri V.N.Patel for the respondent. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the court fees could not be realized from the counsel to whom it was earlier paid and not the appellant has managed the court fees and has paid along with an application I.A.No.8853/12. We have perused the contents of the application and find that the appellant has made out a case for extension of time for payment of the court fees. Accordingly, time period for payment of court fees is extended till today and the court fees is taken on record. Heard on admission. This appeal is admitted for final hearing. Notice on behalf of the respondent is accepted by Shri Patel. Record of the trial Court be summoned. I.A.No.8181/12 for dismissal of appeal because of non- payment of court fees as per the order passed by this Court : In view of the order passed hereinabove, this application has rendered infructuous and it is accordingly dismissed. (Krishn Kumar ...
Lal Mani Verma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2012
Lalmani Verma versus State W.P.No.14091/2012 3/9/2012 : Smt. Smita Arora, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt. Adv.for the respondents on advance notice. Petitioner is working as a Constable and posted in District Sagar. By the impugned order dated 15.7.2012 petitioner has been transferred to Damoh. Challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on the ground that it is contrary to M.P.Police Regulations and pointing out various personal difficulties, petitioner seeks interference in the matter. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record it is seen that seeking cancellation of his transfer petitioner has already submitted his representation and as the said representation is pending, for the present without entering into the controveRs.on merits, the competent authority is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is ...
M/S Baldev Agro Interprijesh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2012
W.P.No.11099 / 2012 (M/S.Baldev Agro Enterprises, Bhopal ..Vs..State of M.P.& otheRs.03-09-2012 Heard Shri Pasrag S. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction to the respondent/authorities to make payments due to him for supply of certain fruit plants to the Janpad Panchayat, Ramnagar, District Satna. It is submitted that in spite of the fact that the Janpad Panchayat, Ramnagar, District Satna has forwarded all the documents to the respondent No.2, the payments due to the petitioner have not been made. In view of the limited prayer made by the petitioner, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner files a fresh representation along with a copy of order passed today and a copy of the petition before the respondent/authorities within fifteen days of obtaining the same, the concerned authority shall conside...
Daya Shankar Pandey Vs. the Director General of Police
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2012
Daya Shankar Pandey versus Director General of Police and others W.P.No.14777/2011 03/09/2012 Shri R.B.Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Bohre, learned PL for the respondents. Petitioner has filed this writ petition inter-alia contending that inspite of orders passed on 8.2.2011, petitioner is not being relieved for joining at his transferred place and, therefore, directions be issued for complying with the ordeRs.Records indicate that petitioner has been promoted from the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector to the post of Sub-Inspector vide order Annexure-R1 and in the promotion order, it is clearly submitted that if against the employee concerned, a departmental enquiry is pending, he should not be relieved. not the respondents have filed the reply and it is pointed out by them that as the departmental enquiry into the charge-sheet is pending, the petitioner cannot be relieved, therefore, no relief can be granted for the present. This Court had directed the respondents to ...
Awadh Kumar Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2012
Awadh Kumar Shrivastava versus State & ORS.W.P.No.13919/2012 03/09/2012 Shri Rajendra Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned GA for the respondents on advance notice. Petitioner is working as Patwari in Patwari Halka No.65 Revenue Circle Sagar DistrictSagar. By the impugned order, petitioner has been transferred to Tehsil Bina. Challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on the ground that petitioner is Office Bearer of a Registered Employees' Association and according to Clause9.23 of the transfer policy, as transfer of the Office Bearer is impermissible, the transfer is illegal. Considering the fact that the petitioner is transferred from one Patwari Halka to another in the same district and further taking note of the fact that breach of transfer policy is No. a ground for interfering with an administrative order of transfer passed, therefore, in view of the law ...
Ganesh Prasad Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2012
Ganesh Prasad Tiwari versus State & ORS.Writ Petition No.13714 3. 9.2012 Shri Gopal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the State. Petitioner is working as Asst. Teacher in Government Purva Madhyamik School Patehara, District Rewa. By the impugned order dated 7.7.2012 petitioner has been suspended and the charge-sheet Annexure P-4 dated 7.7.2012 has been issued to the petitioner. Challenging his suspension and initiation of departmental enquiry petitioner has filed this writ petition. By filing various documents petitioner has tried to demonstrate before this Court that for the alleged act and the misconduct which is subject to having been committed, petitioner is not responsible, it is said that the duties for distributing mid day meals and irregularity committed cannot be attributed to the petitioner as petitioner was not in charge of these duties. By filing various documents petitioner has tried to demonstrate that the charg...
Ku. Rekha Gontiya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2012
W.P.No.14031 / 2012 (Ku. Rekha Gontia .Vs..State of M.P.& otheRs.03-09-2012 Heard Shri Sanjay Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner, who has been removed from the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Bhikhampur, Tahsil Niwas, District Mandla under Section 40 of M.P.Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993, has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 14-8-2012 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur in Case No.555/A-89/A-15/11-12, whereby the stay granted in the revision filed by the petitioner has been vacated on the application filed by the respondent No.4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent No.4 is not a necessary party as has been held by the Collector in the previous proceedings not has she been impleaded as respondent in the revision, in spite of which, the respondent/Additional Commissioner has vacated the interim order of stay ex...
R.K. Choudhari Vs. Principal Secretary the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2012
r.k.choudhari versus state W.P.No.13812/2012 3/9/2012 : Shri Rajesh Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt. Adv.for the respondents. Considering the fact that the representation of the petitioner challenging his transfer from the post of Assistant Veterinary Field Officer, District Office Mandla to Veterinary Hospital, Mehadwani, District Dindori is pending consideration before the competent authority, for the present without entering into the controveRs.on merits, it is directed that respondents shall consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. Till the representation is so decided petitioner be permitted to work at his present place of post, if not already relieved. Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid. c.c.as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge Mr.mishra...
Sunder Lal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2012
Sundar Lal versus State W.P.No.13750/2012 3/9/2012 : Smt. Smita Arora, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt. Adv.for the respondents on advance notice. Petitioner is working as a Constable and posted in District Sagar. By the impugned order dated 14.7.2012 petitioner has been transferred to Tikamgarh. Challenge to the order of transfer is made mainly on the ground that it is contrary to M.P.Police Regulations and pointing out various personal difficulties, petitioner seeks interference in the matter. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record it is seen that seeking cancellation of his transfer petitioner has already submitted his representation and as the said representation is pending, for the present without entering into the controveRs.on merits, the competent authority is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is...
- ‹ Prev
- 147
- 148
- 149
- 150
- 151
- 153
- 154
- 155
- 156
- 157
- Next ›
- Last »