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.
Madho Rao Bhalavi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
W.P.No.15343/2012 21.09.2012 Shri Amit Chaturvedi, learned counsel for petitioneRs.Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Advocate, for respondents on advance copy. The petitioners claim grant of regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment. The benefit is claimed by the petitioners 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 succee...
Govind Prasad Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
W.A.No.1085/2012 21.09.2012 Shri P.C.Paliwal, Advocate for appellant. Shri P.K.Kaurav, Dy. Advocate General for respondents No.1 to 3. This appeal is directed against an order dated 05.09.2012 in W.P.No.12729/2012 by which a writ petition preferred by the appellant against his transfer order dated 15.07.2012 transferring the appellant from Government Higher Secondary School, Umaranala, District Chhindwara to Government Higher Secondary School, Banabakoda, District Chhindwara in the same capacity of the Principal of the School, was disposed of with liberty to the appellant to take recouRs.to the departmental remedies available. This order has been assailed by the appellant on the following grounds:- (1) That the appellant had completed only two years at Umaranala though he was transferred vide order Annexure P-9 dated 13.07.2012 but as per condition no.9 of the transfer order, as the appellant had not completed 3 years at his place of posting, he was not relieved. But subsequently, vide...
Kailash Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
W.P.No.14303 o17. 09.2012 Shri Laljee Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari, learned Govt. Adv for respondents. Heard on the question of admission. (1) The petitioner has come to this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashment of the order dated 7.6.2012, (Ann. P-4) passed by the respondent No.2, Collector as Order No.8037/ Wachak Collector/12 intimated the petitioner that sale transaction with respect of the land of triable being prohibited, his case for permission to sale the land has been dismissed and filed. (2) In the couRs.of arguments, the petitioner's counsel submits that subsequent to such order he has filed review petition, (Ann. P-7) to review the aforesaid direction of Collector, (Ann. P-4) alongwith the original order whereby permission to transfer the land of triable has been refused. In continuation he said that as per existing provision the review petition could be filed and entertained only if the appeal against...
Smt. Bhagwati Johar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
WRIT PETITION No.15443/20121. 09.2012 Shri Aniruddha Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate, for the respondents-State on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. By this petition, the petitioners are claiming the benefit of grant of second Kramonnati under the scheme of the State Government. 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 passed in W.P.No.5756/2008(S).Shri R.C.Chaurasiya & others versus State of M.P.& otheRs.decided on 26.05.2008. In the case of Smt. Prerna (Supra).the directions given are 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 m...
Ku. Agya Singh Chandel Vs. Board of Secondary
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
1 W.P.No.10689/2012 Ku. Agya Singh Chandel versus Board of Secondary Education. 21.09.2012 Shri Mukesh Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.P.Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate, for the State. Shri Mahendra Patariya learned counsel for respondent Board. MRS.Dorothy Paul, Lecturer- General English/Special English and Ms.Deepti Shrivastava, Lecturer Hindi of Pandit L.S.J., Govt. of Excellence, Jabalpur and MRS.Bharati Mookerjee, PGT English and MRS.Sunita Lohra, PGT- Hindi of Kendriya Vidyalaya No.1, GCF, Jabalpur are present in person. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that the evaluation of her answer sheets of the Class-12 Examination, in the subject of English (General) and Hindi (Special).by the respondent Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, is erroneous, illegal and incorrect as a result of which the petitioner has been awarded less marks thereby depriving her of scholarship. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is...
Smt. Kalawati Barman Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
Writ Petition No.15362/2012 21/09/2012 Shri I.S.Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondents-State on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. Stating that the petitioners are also similarly placed persons that of Dharam Pal Chaurasiya and otheRs.who have approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.2858/2005 (S).which was disposed of finally vide order dated 23.11.2007 the petitioners are also entitled to be given the benefit of order passed by coordinate bench of this Court at Indore in W.P.No.6773/2006 (S) (Smt. Prerna W/o Shri Promod Koranne versus State of M.P.& otheRs.decided on 26.1.2007, the petitioners have prayed for similar directions. It is seen that the aforesaid writ petition was decided in the following manner: 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 circ...
Dayaram Nayak Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
W.P.No.15624/2012 ((Dayaram Nayak versus State of M.P.& Ors.) 21.09.2012 Shri S.K.Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.P.Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that the respondent authorities are not permitting or considering the application and the claim of the petitioner for releasing him under the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that the case of the petitioner shall be considered in case he is eligible in accordance with the rules. In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner furnishes a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition before the respondent authorities within 15 days, the authorities shall take up the proceedings and process the request/claim of the petitioner in accordance with ...
Jawahar Lal Kulaste Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
W.P.No.15399/2012 21.09.2012 Shri C.K.Verma, learned counsel for petitioneRs.Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Advocate, for respondents on advance copy. The petitioners claim grant of regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment. The benefit is claimed by the petitioners 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...
Ojharam Evane Vs. Jyoti Dhurve
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
E.P.No.46/2009 21.9.2012 Shri Manikant Sharma, Advocate along with petitioner Ojharam Evne present. Shri R.N.Singh, learned Senior Advocate with Shri A.J.Pawar, counsel for respondent no.1. Shri Vijay Naik, counsel for respondent no.4. Petitioner Ojharam Evne is present. Shri Manikant Sharma, started his examination-in-chief, but during the examination-in-chief, it revealed that the photo copy of certain documents are filed, while the original/certified copies are with the petitioner. Learned counsel for petitioner prays for a short time to move an application in this regard. Subject to objection, if any, which may be raised by the other side on such application, hearing of this case is adjourned. Application, if any, may be filed within a period of one week from today. The reply of the application may be filed within a further period of one week. Be listed for consideration of such an application on 05.10.2012. The statement of witness remained incomplete. No other witness is present....
Rajendra Kumar Nagvanshi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR. Writ Petition No.16217/2010(s) Rajendra Kumar Nagvanshi. -Versus- The State of M.P.& otheRs.PRESENT : Honble Shri Justice K.K.Trivedi. Shri Atul Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate for respondents. ORDER ( .9.2012) 1: The petitioner has come before this Court challenging the order dated 25.10.2010, by which it is communicated to the petitioner that the application submitted by the petitioner for his reinstatement in service is rejected. The order was already communicated to the petitioner after the decision on 25.8.2007, which was duly served in the house of the petitioner on 12.9.2007, therefore, reconsideration of the said claim is not permissible. In fact, the petitioner, who was enrolled as a Constable in the services of the respondent in the year 1987 in the office of the Superintendent of Police, Tikamgarh, was prosecuted in a Criminal Case in the year 2000. In the...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »