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.
Maa Durga Mahila Bahuuddeshiya Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Bihta Vs. the S ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2013
WRIT APPEAL No.751/20102. 01.2013 Shri A.M.Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Rohit Sharma, learned Counsel for the appellant. Shri Vijay Pandey, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents-State. Heard on the question of admission. This writ appeal has been filed under Section 2 of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, challenging the order dated 05.07.2011 passed in W.P.No.5185/2009 by the learned Single Judge. It is contended that learned Single Judge has failed to consider that the shop in question was required to be allotted only and only to the Cooperative Societies like appellant and this being the reason, the order was passed by the State Government. In complete violation of the orders of the State Government, instructions were issued by the Collector, Satna directing that the shop attached to Women Multipurpose Cooperative Societies be immediately removed and be given to the allottee Cooperative Societies. It is contended ...
Beniram Gajbhiye Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2013
Criminal Revision No.1940/2012 02.01.2013 Shri Devesh Khatri, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State. Heard on admission. The applicants are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC (two counts) vide judgment dated 22.2.2012 passed by the learned JMFC Seoni. The appeal preferred by the applicants was also dismissed being barred by limitation. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the entire evidence led before the court below, it is very well established that the applicants are guilty for the offence under Section 323 of IPC for two counts. Under such circumstances, the learned court below has not committed any error in passing the impugned judgment. There is no basis by which any interference can be done in the judgment. Consequently, the present revision appears to be not acceptable. Hence, it is hereby dismissed at motion stage. (N.K.Gupta) Judge Ansari...
Lakhan Singh Thakur Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2013
W.P.No.10/2013 02.01.2013 Shri Sourabh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondents-State. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is finally heard. The learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing the matter to some extent submits upon instructions from the petitioner, Lakhan Singh Thakur, who is present in Court, that the petitioner undertakes to remove the Durga Devi Temple within a period of fifteen days from today. The undertaking given by the petitioner is accepted. Accordingly, we direct that till then the respondents shall not take any coercive action in respect of the said temple. The petitioner is directed to file the undertaking in writing to the above effect in this Court within a period of three days from today. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. C.c.as per rules during couRs.of the day. (S.A.Bobde) (K.K.Trivedi) Chief Justice Judge ac....
Param Sukh Soni Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2013
Writ Petition No. 20869 Of 2012 2.1.2013 Shri Sanjay Saini, learned counsel for the petitioner. Default pointed out by the office is ignored. Heard. PetitioneRs. Assistant Teachers under Tribal Welfare Department, vide this petition seeks direction to the respondents for grant of regular pay scale from their initial date of appointment. The relief has been sought on the strength of decision rendered in Smt. Usha Ranawat v. State of M.P. and others (W.A. No. 346/2008) decided on 18.12.2008. Since parity is being claimed; instead of dwelling upon the merit of the matter, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners at par with petitioner in Smt. Usha Ranawat (supra) and take a decision within a period of 30 days from the date of communication of this order. Petitioner along with certified copy of this order shall also plac...
Darshan Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2013
Criminal Revision No.2034/2012 02.01.2013 Shri Manish Datt, Sr.Advocate with Shri Yogesh Soni, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. This Criminal Revision under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C.has been filed by the applicant being aggrieved by the order dated 21.9.2012 passed by the JMFC Gairatganj District Raisen in RT No.468/2011 by which the charges for commission of offence punishable under Sections 353, 294, 506 (Part-II) of IPC are appended against the present applicant. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the copy of charge sheet and other documents, it appears that it is alleged by the complainant against the applicant that he shouted and gave a threat to the complainant. There is no allegation of the complainant that the applicant used any criminal force upon him or assaulted him, therefo...
Gram Panchayat Kesala Vs. National Highway Authority of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2013
W.P.No.15984/2012 2.1.2013: Shri G.S.Ahluwalia, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri K.N.Pethia, learned counsel for the respondent No.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties on I.A.No.15472/2012 an application filed by respondent No.1 for vacating the order of status quo granted by this Court on 16.10.2012. Matter pertains to construction of the National Highway between Obedullahganj and Betul. The dispute in question is with regard to construction of national highway in village Kesla. Petitioner No.1 is Gram Panchayat Kesla and remaining petitioners are owners of the land. It is a case of the petitioners that land of the petitioners are being taken away and while doing so their objections as required are not being decided in accordance to the provisions of Section 3(c) of the National Highways Act. That apart, it is stated that the Gram Panchayat and the National Highway authority and the other authorities of the administration have entered into certain negotiation and in an ill...
Rupnarayan Singh Thakur Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2013
1 W.P.No.21514/2012 W.P.No.21514/2012 02.1.2013 Shri R.Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Govt. Advocate for respondents. PetitioneRs.Assistant Teachers in School Education Department by this petition seeks direction to respondents to grant benefit of two advance increments in lieu of their acquiring D.Ed/B.Ed qualification. Relief has been claimed on the anvil of a decision rendered in Smt. Asha Saxena V. State of M.P and others arising out of S.L.P (Civil) No.18881/06. Learned Govt. Advocate for respondents has no objection if the petition is disposed of with a direction to consider the claim of the petitioneRs.In view whereof, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for benefit of two advance increments in lieu of their acquiring D.Ed/B.Ed qualification and take a decision within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order. The petition is disposed of finally in...
The General Manager Vs. Shri Ramesh Prasad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR WRIT PETITION No.81/2010 The General Manager Vs. Shri Ramesh Prasad ____________________________________________________________ Shri Anoop Nair, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Pranay Choubey, learned Counsel for respondent. ____________________________________________________________ Present : Honble Shri Justice K.K. Trivedi ____________________________________________________________ ORDER (02/01/2013) The petitioner has called in question the order dated 01.09.2009 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur (herein after referred to as CGIT) whereby the order of terminating the services of respondent is set aside, by filing this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India on the grounds that the CGIT was not correct in holding that the domestic enquiry conducted against the respondent was bad in law and, therefore, it was erroneously held by the CGIT that the respondent was illegall...
Jodha Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2013
Jodha versus State & ORS.Serial No.:1 Writ Petition No.21362 2. 1.2013: Shri Vinot Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Challenge to the show-cause notice issued to petitioner for removing encroachment under Section 248 of the M.P.Land Revenue Code, petitioner has filed this writ petition. Against show-cause notice issued petitioner has remedy of raising the objection and after orders are passed petitioner has remedy of filing fiRs.appeal, second appeal under Section 44 of the M.P.Land Revenue Code and thereafter revision under Section 15, therefore, a petition directly before this Court without taking recouRs.of all this statutory remedy is not permissible. Accordingly granting liberty to the petitioner to take recouRs.of statutory remedy available this petition is disposed of. (Rajendra Menon) Judge ss/-...
Ramashray Prasad Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2013
1 W.P.No.21804/2012 W.P.No.21804/2012 02.1.2013 Shri Ajay Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Govt. Advocate for respondents. Heard. Petitioner by way of present petition seeks direction to the respondents to grant benefit of second kramonnati w.e.f 1999 as has been held in case of Smt Prerna Korane w/o Shri Pramod Koranne v. State of M.P.and otheRs.in W.P.No.6773/06, decided on 26.4.07. In view of nature of relief as has been sought for by the petitioner, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the claim of the petitioner for benefit of second kramonnati in furtherance to order passed in Smt. Prerna (supra) and settle the claim within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order. In case the petitioner is not found eligible, respondents are directed to pass a speaking order and communicate it to the petitioner. The petition is disposed of finally in above terms . No costs. Certified copy as per...
- ‹ Prev
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- Next ›
- Last »