Madhya Pradesh Court March 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.
Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2013
W.P.No.3829/2013 21/03/2013 Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Grievance of the petitioner is that even though certain orders have been passed by the Labour Court and the Industrial Court and the monitory benefits accruing to the petitioner have to be recovered, for which a Revenue Recovery Certificate Annexure-P8 has been issued on 4.10.2012 and 28.10.2012 but no action is taken in pursuance to the Revenue Recovery Certificate issued. Accordingly, seeking a direction to the respondents to get the recovery made, this writ petition has been filed. Taking into consideration the aforesaid grievance of the petitioner, it is directed that on the petitioner's filing a certified copy of this order along the relevant documents, Respondent Nos.2 and 3 shall proceed to recover the amount in accordance with certificate issued after hearing all concerned and after following due process of law and complete the recovery proceedings within a period of two months. With the afo...
M.P.State Electricity Board Vs. Tushar Ukey Th. Smt. Saritha Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2013
F.A. No.109/2007 -1- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava F.A. No.109/2007 1. M.P.STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD THROUGH CHAIRMAN MPSEB,RAMPUR,JABALPUR 2 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (O & M) DIVISION, MPPKVVCL, BALAGHAT ...Appellants/defendants -Versus- 1. TUSHAR UKEY s/o RAM CHARAN UKEY 2 KU. KALYANI d/o RAM CHARAN UKEY 3 ADITYA s/o RAM CHARAN UKEY 1 to 3 minot represented through their mother Smt. Saritha Bai Ukey, R/o Ward No.23, Balaghat. ... Respondents/Plaintiffs 4. SOUTH GENERAL FOREST RANGE BALAGHAT THROUGH FOREST OFFICER FOREST DEPARTMENT SOUTH GENERAL, BALAGHAT 5 DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER SOUTH GENERAL FOREST DIVISION, BALAGHAT 6 STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH COLLECTOR, BALAGHAT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Vivek Rusia and Miss Trupti Jadhav, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. B.M. Prasad, Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3. Ms. Pratibha Mishra, Panel Lawyer for the respondents 4 ...
Ramesh Dhurwey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2013
Ramesh Dhurwey & ORS.versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.4191 21. 3.2013 Shri Praveen Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Petitioner has filed this petition claiming regular pay scale in view of the Circulars issued by the State Government extending the benefit of regular pay scale to employees who are working in the Work Charged and Contingency Paid Establishment against sanctioned vacant posts. Even though respondents have tried to contend that petitioner is not entitled for the said benefit but from the facts that have come on record it is seen that the Indore Bench of this Court vide order passed on 29.10.2003 in W.P.No.4389/03 following an earlier order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.128/99 (Smt. Savitri Bai versus State of M.P.) directed the State Government to consider the case of employees in the light of directions issued in the case of Smt. Savitri Bai (supra) and decide the mat...
Mahmood Khan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2013
W.P.No.3127/2013 21/03/2013 Smt. Sudha Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Issue notice. At this stage Shri Prashant Singh, learned Additional Advocate General appears and takes notice on behalf of Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4. Two copies of the petition along with annexures be served on Shri Prashant Singh, who may seek instructions in the matter. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the question of interim relief. The State Government vide circular dated 20th of January, 2000 has increased the age of retirement of Daily Wages Employees from 60 to 62 yeaRs.Claiming benefit of this enhanced age of retirement, this writ petition has been filed. Even though, Shri Prashant Singh raised an objection and submitted that only such Daily Wages Employees are entitled to the benefit of enhanced age, who are receiving a fixed wage and not wages in the Time Scale of Pay. The aforesaid contention of Shri Prashant Singh seems to be incorrect, if the circular issued by the State Government vid...
Gajanand Choudhary Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2013
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SB: HON. SHRI N.K.GUPTA,J.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.72/2013 Gajanand Choudhary. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Syed Zahirruddin, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 21st day of March, 2013) The applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 324, 294, 506-B of IPC vide judgment dated 16.4.2012 passed by the CJ.Burhanpur (Shri A.A.Khan) in Criminal Case No.1831/2009 and sentenced for one year's RI with fine of Rs.500/-, one year's RI with fine of Rs.500/- and fine of Rs.500/- respectively. In Criminal Appeal No.57/2012 the learned Additional Sessions Judge to the First Additional Sessions Judge Burhanpur vide judgment dated 17.12.2012 partly allowed the appeal by which t...
Danish Daniel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2013
M.Cr.C. No.2644/2013 21.3.13 Shri B.J. Chourasiya , counsel for the applicant. Shri R.K. Kesharwani, PL for the respondent/State. Heard. This is an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail. Applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.53/2013 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Chhatarpur for offence punishable under Sections 452, 323, 294, 506B, 34 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He is ready to cooperate in the investigation. As per prosecution itself, it is alleged against the applicant that he trespass the house of the complainant after having a Danda in his hand. In these circumstances, no case under Section 452 of IPC is made out against the applicant. All other offences are bailable and triable by Magistrate. He is reputed person of the society and in the event...
Haneef @ Ashgar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2013
M.Cr.C.No.1658/2013 21.3.2013 Shri Ramkirpal Mishra, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Akhilendra Singh, GA 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 23.3.2011 in connection with Crime No.31/2011 registered at P.S.Kesla, District Hoshangabad for the offence punishable under Sections 392, 408 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. As many as 11 witnesses have been examined before the trial Court. The applicant is in custody for about two years and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, he be released on bail. Learned counsel for the 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 the applicant on bail,...
Dr. Smt. Shashi Prabha Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2013
WRIT PETITION No.4028/20121. 03.2013 Shri Sachin Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner. The claim of the petitioner is squarely covered by a decision of this Court where it has been held that in case an employee is granted a benefit of Kramonnati on account of stagnating on one post for a period of 12 or 24 yeaRs.the said benefit cannot be withdrawn on account of subsequent promotion. As per the instructions issued by the State Government, the salary of the person is to be fixed in accordance to the scale of pay on which he was working before the date of his promotion in terms of Fundamental Rule 22-A. The issue involved in this writ petition has already been decided by this Court in W.P.No.379/2009, Smt. Santosh Verma versus State of M.P.& otheRs.vide order dated 19.07.2011. The aforesaid writ petition has been disposed of in the following manner : 9. The fact remains that the petitioner has retired on 30th June, 2008 and on this date she was drawing the salary of Rs.9,900/- basi...
Smt.Archana Sen Vs. Pappu @ Satish Andors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2013
Cr.R.No.1673/1999 21.3.2013 Shri Mukhtar Ahmed, counsel for the applicant. None for the respondents no.1 to 3. Shri S.K.Kashyap, Public Prosecutor for the State/respondent no.4. Heard on admission. The respondents no.1 to 3 were convicted for offences punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and sentenced for 18 months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- and six months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- vide judgment dated 28.12.1998 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sagar in Criminal Case No.548/1991. In Criminal Appeal No.7/1999 and 8/1999 the learned Sessions Judge, Sagar vide judgment dated 16.8.1999 accepted the appeal and acquitted the respondents no.1 to 3 from the various charges of offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Being aggrieved with the judgment passed by the FiRs.Appellate Court the applicant/complainant has preferred the present revision. The prosecution's c...
Bhagwan Das Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2232/2013 21.3.2013 Shri Sharad Verma, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Akhilendra Singh, GA 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 1.2.2013 in connection with Crime No.35/2013 registered at P.S.Pathariya, District Damoh for the offence punishable under section 34(2) and 42 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, 54 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...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »