Madhya Pradesh Court January 2013 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.
Rakshit Joseph Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2013
1 M. Cr.C.NO.8744/09. 22.1.2013. Shri Istiaq Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Lalit Joglekar, learned PL for the respondent. By referring the copy of the order dated 16.1.2012 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in WP No.18373/11 directing that till further consideration of this interim prayer, no coercive steps against the petitioner will be taken by the respondent/ authority not any final order in the disciplinary proceedings be passed against him., the petitioner's counsel seeks permission to withdraw IA No.16481/09, as not pressed. After taking the copy of aforesaid order on record by allowing the prayer of the applicant's counsel IA No.16481/09, an application for grant of stay is hereby dismissed as withdrawn and not pressed. (U.C.Maheshwari) Judge k...
Girjabai Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No :6704. OF 201.Girjabai & Ors. - V/s - The Union of India & Ors. Present : Honble Shri Justice Rajendra Menon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Jaideep Sirpurkar, learned counsel for the petitioners. Shri Mohan Sausarkar, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 4. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.2 & 3. ORDER (22/01/2013) Challenging the publication made by the National Highways Authority, a statutory authority created under the National Highways Act, 1956 hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1956. and contending that the notifications for acquisition of land is undertaken contrary to the requirements of Section 3-C and 3-D of the Act, 1956, this writ petition is filed.2. Petitioners herein claim to be owners and cultivating the land in question as detailed in Para-5.1 of the writ petition. Respondents have initiated action for construction o...
Smt. Heera Thakur Gond Vs. Shri Shashi Bhushan Sharma
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2013
Conc Case No :296. / 2012 Smt. Heera Thakur Gond versus Shri Shashi Bhushan Sharma 22.01.2013. Shri S.K.Garg for the applicant. Shri Kamlesh Dwivedi for the non-applicant. In view of the order passed by the non-applicant as contained in Annexure R/2 dated 2.3.2012, no further action is required to be taken in the matter. In case, applicant has any grievance with regard to the manner in which consideration has been made, he may challenge the same afresh in accordance with law. Accordingly, the non-applicant is discharged and the application disposed of with the aforesaid liberty to the applicant. Certified copy as per rules. (RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE Aks/-...
Ku. Vijeta Soni Vs. the Secretary, Madhya Pradesh Professional Examina ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2013
Writ Petition No.999/2013 22.01.2013 Mr.Devesh Bhojne, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Samdarshi Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave of this Court to implead State of M.P.as a party respondent in the instant writ petition. Let the amendment be carried out during the couRs.of the day. In this writ petition, the petitioner inter-alia seeks a direction to consider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment on the post of contract teacher as against the vacant post meant for OBC category. Learned counsel for the parties submit that the controveRs.involved in the instant writ petition is squarely covered by the order dated 13.09.2012 passed in writ petition No.101054/2012. In view of submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the rules and regulations governing exemption permit change of category at this stage respondents may consider the representat...
Mahendra Shigh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.2344/2010 Mahendra Singh, son of Govardhan Singh, aged about 33 years, resident of village Gharaula Mohalla Ward No.17, P.S. Shahdol, Distt. Shahdol Appellant vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, through SHO, Kotwali Distt. Shahdol Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Narendra Nikhare, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Akshay Namdeo, P.L. for the respondent/State. JUDGMENT (22.1.2013) This appeal has been preferred against the judgment-dated 10.11.2010 passed by Special Judge [under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the Act), Shahdol in Special Case No.4/09, whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 8 years and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/- and in...
Govind Mallah Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR Cri. Appeal No.315/2003 Govind Mallah, son of Deshraj Mallah, aged about 30 years, Resident of Ramghat Pipariya, P.S. Shahpura, Presently residing at Village Bagdari, Tahsil Patan, Distt. Jabalpur Appellant vs. State of M.P., through SHO P.S. Patan, Distt. Jabalpur Respondent .. Shri M.S. Jain, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Akshay Namdeo, P.L. for respondent-State. JUDGMENT (22/1/13) The appellant stands convicted under Section 436 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years. Corresponding judgment dated 13.2.2003 passed by Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in S.T.No.717/02 is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal.2. Prosecution story, in short, is that on 12/9/02 at about 3 P.M., the appellant set fire to a hut constructed by his wife Munni Bai (PW2) on Government land located in Village Bagdari by using kerosene as the medium. The fire engulfed the adjacent hut belonging to her sister Girja Bai (PW1). Consequently, the thatched roof...
K.P.Ahirwar Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2013
W.P.(S).No.760/2005 22.01.2013 Shri Akash Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri P. Shankaran, learned counsel for the respondents. This petition under Article 226/227 of Constitution of India has been filed challenging the validity of order dated 13.10.2004 passed in Original Application No.561/2002 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal').It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the law as laid down by the Apex Court in various cases were not taken into consideration and despite the fact that there was breach of the roster required to be maintained for reservation, the claim made by the petitioner was denied. It is contended that the order of promotion with respect to certain reserved category candidates so issued was thus violative of the reservation policy and as such the same was liable to be quashed. Per contra, it is contended by learned counsel for the respondents that there was no violation of the r...
Dr. Raj Kumar Dhurve Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2013
W.P.No.2564/2013 22.02.2013 Shri V.D.S.Chouhan, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Heard on the question of admission. The writ petition is admitted for final hearing. Issue notice of this writ petition to the respondents on payment of P.F.within 7 days by registered A.D.Notices be made returnable in six weeks. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that order dated 07.07.2009 was issued pursuance to the amendment in the M.P.Public Health and Family Welfare Gazetted Service Recruitment Rules, 2007, which came into force on the publication in the M.P.Gazette Part-IV (Ga) dated 04.01.2008. It is further contended that not the said benefit is being withdrawn by the impugned order dated 30.05.2012 (Annexure P-1).Once the benefit is extended pursuance to the amendment in the Rules, the same cannot be withdrawn without withdrawing the amendment in the Rules. Considering the aforesaid, the operation of impugned order dated 30.05.2012 (Annexure P-1).shall remain stayed till th...
Amrit Lal Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2013
W.P.No.1096/2013 22/01/2013 Shri Vijay K. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 on advance notice. Shri Kapil Jain, learned counsel for Respondent No.4 also on advance notice. Petitioner claims to be owner of certain land bearing KhaSr.No.399 Patwari Halka 20 Sagra. It is stated that adjoining the said land of the petitioner, land bearing KhaSr.No.409/1 in the name of the husband of Respondent No.5 is situated. It is stated that Respondent No.5 has submitted an application before Respondent No.3 for the purpose of granting a dealership license for establishing a petroleum outlet and while submitting documents with regard to the property or land owned by her and her family membeRs.it is stated that certain area belonging to the petitioner and situated in KhaSr.No.399 has been encroached upon and shown in the account of Respondent No.5. Bringing on record various orders passed by the revenue authorities and proceedings w...
Prabhudayal Dixit Vs. Shri A.K. Varwal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-22-2013
Conc Case No :605. / 2012 Prabhudayal Dixit and others versus Shri A.K.Varnaval and another. 22.01.2013. Shri Neeraj Nahar for the applicants. Shri S.S.Bisen, Government Advocate, for the non- applicants. Interalia contending that certain directions issued by this Court on 14.9.2011, in Writ Petition No.15029/2011(S).has not been complied with, this application has been filed for initiating action for contempt. The writ petition was disposed of on the very fiRs.date, without notice to the non-applicants and the non- applicants were directed to consider the case of the applicants in the light of the judgment rendered in the case of Madhukant Yadu versus State of Madhya Pradesh in O.A.No.2745/1989, decided on 24.8.1992, and thereafter confer benefit to the applicants in accordance to the said judgment. It was further directed by this Court that if on examination, non-applicants find that the applicants are not entitled to the same, they are at liberty to reject the claim by a speaking or...
- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »