Madhya Pradesh Court February 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.
Mahendra Kumar Gupta Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2013
Writ Petition No.3102/2013 28.02.2013 Mr.Gajendra Tamsikar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Piyush Dharmadhikari, learned Government Advocate for the respondents. Heard. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity of order dated 21.02.2013, by which the petitioner, who is Assistant Grade-III has been transferred from Office of Tahsildar, Kotma to Office of Tahsildar, Pushprajgarh. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only six months ago he joined the Office of Tahsildar at Kotma and the order of transfer has been passed during ban period in violation of policy of transfer. It is further submitted that the writ petition be disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to the Competent Authority and the Competent Authority be directed to consider and decide the same. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate submits that the representation submitted by the petitioner shall be dealt with in accordance with law. In...
G.P.Gupta Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR WRIT PETITION No.16795/2003 (S) G.P. Gupta Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & others ____________________________________________________________ Present : Honble Shri Justice K.K. Trivedi ____________________________________________________________ Shri D.N. Shukla, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned Deputy Government Advocate, for the respondents-State. ____________________________________________________________ ORDER (28.02.2013) This petition was originally filed as O.A. No.219/2001 before the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, calling in question the order dated 01.12.2000 by which a penalty of recovery of Rs.51,007/- from the pensionary benefits of the petitioner is ordered. After closer of the Tribunal, the petition has been transmitted to this Court and is registered as writ petition.2. Brief facts giving rise of filing this petition are that...
Sanjay Yadav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2013
W.P.No.18906/2011 Sanjay Yadav State of M.P.& another 28.2.2013 Shri Rajendra Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate with Shri R.K.Tripathi, counsel for petitioner. Shri Vijay Pandey, Dy. A.G., for respondents alongwith Dr.Guha present. The petitioner has sought following reliefs :- (i) That, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for the record of the Central Forensic Laboratory Chandigarh which is in possession of the respondents. (ii) That, by issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 6.5.2010 (Annexure P/4) in its entirety. (iii) That, by issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to command the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue his studies further from the second year of M.B.B.S.CouRs.in the N.S.C.B.Medical College, Jabalpur. (iv) That, by issuance of a writ in the nature of Prohibition, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an order of restraint ag...
Najai Bai Vs. Shri K.K. Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2013
Najai Bai versus Shri K.K.Singh & Others Conc. No.1224 28. 2.2013: Shri Rajendra Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.P.Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents. On 16.12.2011, W.P.No.21112/2011 was disposed of by this Court without notice to the respondents and without hearing them and the only direction issued was that claim of petitioner for regularization be considered in accordance to the circular Annexure P-1 that was filed in the original writ petition and decision taken. Respondents have filed the return and it is brought to the notice of this Court in the return that no such rule as claimed by the petitioner and filed as Annexure P-1 in the writ petition is available, no such provision has been incorporated by the department and on examination as it was found that no such statutory rule is available. However, by filing rejoinder petitioner has brought on record orders passed on 29.6.1998 and 5.12.2001 Annexure C-4 and C-5 and contend that on the basis of M.P.G...
Smt. Rehana Parveen Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2013
M.Cr.C.No.14625/2012 28.2.2013 Shri Pratyush Tripathi, Advocate for the applicant. Shri R.K.Kesarwani, PL for the State. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been released on ad-interim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 17.12.2012 and the applicant did not misuse the liberty granted to her. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application. Since applicant has already been released on ad-interim anticipatory bail by this Court and there is no report that she misused the liberty granted to her, the order dated 17.12.2012 is hereby made absolute for a period of 60 days only. In the meanwhile, if the applicant so desires, may apply for regular bail before the competent Court, which shall be considered by that Court, in accordance with law. Certified copy as per rules. (G.S.Solanki) Judge PB...
Smt. Shanti Bai (D) Shakun Bai Vs. Jaswant Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2013
1 MCC No.1793/2011 Smt. Shanta Bai & ORS.versus Jaswant Singh & ORS.28.02.2013 Shri Arun Kumar Choubey learned counsel for the applicants. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants on I.A No.15254/2011, an application for condonation of delay, as well as on the application for restoration. The application has been filed by the applicants, who were the appellants in S.A No.500/1982 after a lapse of 21 years 119 days seeking restoration of the Second Appeal which was dismissed on account of non-compliance of the peremptory order dated 9.7.1990. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants did not come to knot about the dismissal of the Second Appeal as the husband of applicant no.1 used to deal with the matter and did not inform the applicants about the pendency of the appeal. It is submitted that it was only when the respondents asserted their right on the land in question that they came to knot about the dismissal of the appeal and they came to Jabal...
Chetram Vs. K.K.Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2013
Chetram versus Shri K.K.Singh & Others Conc. No.1221 28. 2.2013: Shri Rajendra Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents. On 16.12.2011 W.P.No.21111/2011 was disposed of by this Court without notice to the respondents and without hearing them and the only direction issued was that claim of petitioner for regularization be considered in accordance to the circular Annexure P-1 that was filed in the original writ petition and decision taken. Respondents have filed the return and it is brought to the notice of this Court in the return that no such rule as claimed by the petitioner and filed as Annexure P-1 in the writ petition is available, no such provision has been incorporated by the department and on examination as it was found that no such statutory rule is available. However, by filing rejoinder petitioner has brought on record orders passed on 29.6.1998 and 5.12.2001 Annexure C-4 and C-5 and contend that on the basis of M.P.G...
Mohd. Naeem Qureshi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2025/2013 28.2.2013 Shri Nishant Datt, Advocate for the applicant. Shri G.S.Thakur, PL for the State. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 31.1.2013 in connection with Crime No.486/2010 registered at P.S.Betul, District Betul for the offence punishable under section 34(2) of the M.P.Excise Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. As per prosecution, 315 bulk liters of illicit liquor alleged to have been seized from the possession of the applicant. The applicant is in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, he be released on bail. Learned counsel for State has opposed the application. On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties and overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case to release th...
Dularibai Vishwakarma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2013
1 M. Cr.C.NO.1975/13 28.2.2013. Shri Abhijit Awasthy, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Vivek Lakhera, learned PL for the respondent/ State. Copy of the challan papers have been filed, therefore, this petition is heard finally. The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR and challan of Crime No.102/12 of P.S.Chargawan, District Jabalpur for the offence under Section 306/34 of IPC. The FIR has been registered on 26.8.2012, as wife of the Bijju @ Brajendra committed suicide along with her two children by jumping in the Narmada River. On Merg inquiry it has been found that on the date of the incident she was beaten by her husband in the morning on a dispute of throwing the cooked vegetable, which was prepared in the earlier night for dinner. The allegations against the petitioners are that some altercation took place in the night between the deceased and petitioneRs.who are mother-in-law and Jeth respectively and the deceased was beate...
Prem Narayan Sharma Vs. Shri Vikas Awasthy
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2013
Prem Narayan Sharma versus Shri Vikas Awasthy Conc. No.490 28. 2.2013: Shri B.M.Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S.Bisen, learned counsel for the respondent. Considering the fact that a writ petition filed against the order dated 10.11.2011 passed in W.P.No.24537/2003 has been dismissed recently on 11.1.2013, respondents are directed to grant benefit to petitioner as already ordered in the writ petition within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In view of above, for the present, the application is disposed of and respondents to submit compliance report to the Registrar General of this Court. With the aforesaid this application is disposed of. (Rajendra Menon) Judge ss/...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »