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.
Smt. Brijees Durrani Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
Writ Petition No. 5731 Of 2010 (S) 7.1.2013 Ms. Rajeshwari Nair, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for respondent State. With consent of learned counsel for the parties the matter is heard finally. Non implementation of periodical pay revision since 1995 leading to nonsettlement of pension is the grievance which is being raised vide this petition by the petitioner who retired from the service of the respondents from the post of Tracer on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f 26.2.2010. Petitioner was initially appointed as Tracer on ad hoc basis on a fixed pay of Rs.169/ per month + usual allowances as sanctioned by the Government from time to time vide office order No. 2201/E234 of 74 dated 31.12.1974 issued by Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, National Highway, Circle Bhopal. That, by order No. 975/E dated 24.9.1975 servic...
Smt. Manju Gambhir Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
Writ Petition No. 21143 Of 2012 7.1.2013 Shri Pranay Choubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Sharma, learned Government Advocate for respondent State. Heard. Petitioner, Teacher in Private Grant in Aid School run by respondent No. 3 vide this petition seeks direction to fix her pay in the pay scale at par with the teachers teaching in School Education Department, in the Government of Madhya Pradesh and extend the benefit of recommendation of 5th Pay Commission as well as 6th Pay Commission w.e.f 1.4.2006. It is not disputed at Bar that the claim as is being put forth by the petitioner is covered by decision rendered in Review Petition No. 243/2009 Shyam Narayan Giri and others v. Shri I.S. Dani and others decided on 14.10.2011. The said review petition was decided on the anvil of order dated 22.7.2011 issued by the State Government in the following terMs.In view of the afore...
Nanhelal Chouhan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
M.Cr.C.No.82 /2013 M.Cr.C.No.82/2013 7.1.2013 Shri Manish Datt, Senior Advocate along with Shri Nishant Datt, Advocate for the applicant. Shri S.K.Kashyap, Public Prosecutor for the State/respondent. As prayed by the learned counsel for the applicant, with consent of the learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard finally. The applicant has moved an application to get the extension of time granted in the judgment dated 12.10.2012 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.2203/1996. In that order, it was directed that the applicant shall deposit fine amount of Rs.7,000/- before the trial Court within a period of two months from 12.10.2012 and therefore, not the applicant prays for extension of time. According to the judgment dated 12.10.2012, the applicant was directed to deposit a fine of Rs.7,000/- within two months from 12.10.2012 and default sentence was also prescribed. According to section 68 of IPC, if fine is deposited either in the jail or before the trial Court then, def...
Abdul Jamil Ansari Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
Second Appeal No.668 / 1996 ( Abdul Jamil Ansari..Vs.State of Madhya Pradesh ) 07-01-2013 Heard Shri A.K.Jain, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/plaintiff on the question of admission. This appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 14-5-1996 passed by the 7th Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Bhopal, in C.A.No.12-A/96, whereby the appeal filed by the appellant/plaintiff has been dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 17-10-1995, passed by the 3rd Civil Judge Class I, Bhopal, in C.S.No.52-A/91 has been affirmed. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff that the appellant had filed a suit for permanent injunction in respect of a plot of land situated in Koh-e-fiza, Bhopal, which had been initially given to one Nazir by the erstwhile Nawab Nameedullah in the year 1946 in lieu of the services rendered by him and thereafter he had constructed a temporary house thereon. It is stated that the...
J.N.Patle Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
1 W.P.No.16723/2010 07.1.2013 Shri Manot Mishra,learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for respondents. Petitioner , Head Master in School Education Department by way of present petition seeks following direction: (i)to call for the entire recores pertaining to the case of petitioner for the satisfaction of this Hon'ble Court. (ii)To command the respondents to pay the arrears of salary of sixth pay scale for the period of 01.9.2008 to 1.4.2010 and the due instalment of the arrears for the period of 1.1.2006 to 31.12.2008 along with interest of 18% per annum (iii) Any other relief order or directions which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case also be granted along with costs of the petition in the interest of justice. On being noticed respondents have filed their return wherein paragraphs 2 and 3 it is categorically stated: 2. The answering respondents respectfully submit that the recommendation ...
Ram Khelawan Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
1 W.P.No.18946/2006(s) 07.01.2013 Shri Ravendra Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Govt. Advocate for respondents. Heard. Petitioner, retired Timekeeper, Public Works Department vide this petition seeks direction to the respondents to grant benefit of two Krammonati in pursuance to circular dated 17.3.1999/19.4.1999 and 7/2/2001. Undisputed facts culled out from the record are that, the petitioner having being engaged as Time Keeper on daily wages on 1.7.1992 was brought on the work charged and contingency paid establishment and having worked for 34 years retired as Time Keeper, Work charged Establishment, w.e.f 30.11.2006 on attaining the age of superannuation. The case of the petitioner is despite of having worked for 34 yeaRs.he was not given any career advancement. It is urged that he is entitled for grant of Krammonati as per policy of the respondent circulated on 17.3.99/19.4.99 and reiterated vide letter dated 7.2.2001. The petitioner accordingly...
Tejbali Patel Vs. Smt.Gulabi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
Criminal Revision.No.512/2012 Criminal Revision.No.512/2012 7.1.2013 Shri Brijendra Kushwaha, Advocate for the applicant. None for the respondent. The applicant has challenged the order dated 9.1.2012 passed by the Principal Judge of Family Court, Rewa in MJ.No.128/2011, whereby the maintenance amount of the respondent was increased from a sum of Rs.700/- p.m.to a sum of Rs.3,000/- p.m.It is established before the Court that expenditure of the respondent is increased due to dearness and salary of the applicant is also increased from a sum of Rs.6,000/- to a sum of Rs.12,636/-. There is no children to the applicant and therefore, he would be entitled to spend 1/3rd of his salary and therefore, if a maintenance of Rs.3,000/- is granted to the respondent then, it cannot be said that it is a higher amount or the applicant cannot pay the amount. There is no basis by which the present revision can be accepted. No illegality or perversity is visible in the impugned order dated 9.1.2012. Conse...
Dhaniram Markam Vs. S.D.O. [Revenue]
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
1 W.A.No.323/2012 Dhaniram Markam S.D.O.(Revenue) Baihar & others 7.1.2013 Ms.C.V.Rao, Counsel for appellant. Shri Dhaneshkant Tiwari, Counsel for respondent No.2. This appeal is directed against an order dated 5.3.2012 in W.P.No.9422/2011 by which learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition in part and issued certain directions. The matter was in respect of the re-counting of the votes by the Election Tribunal for the office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Pandaria. It is submitted by Ms.Rao that after the order passed by the Single Bench, recounting was done in which respondent No.2 has been declared as elected Sarpanch. Aforesaid order has been assailed by the appellant by filing a fresh petition bearing W.P.No.8496/2012, so appellant may be permitted to withdraw this appeal with liberty to raise all these grounds in the pending writ petition. Aforesaid prayer is opposed by Shri Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 on the ground that the grounds which were rai...
Kehar Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
Criminal Revision No.1535/2012 07.01.2013 Shri Amit Dubey, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the Respondent-State. At the request of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard. The applicant has moved the present revision against the order dated 6.6.2012 passed by the FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge to the Court of the FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Panna in Criminal Appeal No.58/2012, whereby the appeal filed by the applicant was dismissed, which was filed against the order dated 5.5.2012 passed by the JMFC Panna (Shri Pankaj Jaiswal) in Criminal Case No.363/2012 in which the age of the applicant was found to be above 18 yeaRs.The applicant has also challenged the order passed by the JMFC in the present revision. The brief facts of the case are that Crime No.8/2012 was registered at Police Station Gunore District Panna for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 34 of IPC against the applicant and his age was under question. The learne...
Sukh Lal @ Sharad Kumar Sen Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
WP 1904.06 Writ Petition No.1904 of 2006 (Sukh Lal @ Sharad Kumar Sen v State of M.P.and two otheRs.07-01-2013 Shri Jiendra Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondents/State. Heard. Petitioner, a Driver in the Work Charged Establishment of Water Resources Department posted at Sub-Division Damoh, vide this petition has raised grievance against recovery of penal rent in lieu of his occupying the Government Quarter. The petitioner also seeks refund of Rs.50,000/- alleged to have been spent by him for upliftment/renovation of the Government Quarter under his occupation. Respective pleadings on record reflect indisputably that the petitioner is in occupation of a Government Quarter G/8 in Sobha Nagar (Pancham Nagar Colony).Damoh. Apparently, there is no order in favour of the petitioner for occupation of the said Government Quarter, which the petitioner submits, has been occupied on the basis of an oral order/permission given to...
- ‹ Prev
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- Next ›
- Last »