Madhya Pradesh Court May 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.
Mahesh Chandra Solanki Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-2013
WA No.1003 of 2012 WA No.1004 of 2012 WA No.1015 of 2012 WA No.1016 of 2012 WA No.1017 of 2012 WA No.1018 of 2012 WA No.1019 of 2012 WA No.1028 of 2012 WA No.1029 of 2012 WA No.1030 of 2012 WA No.1038 of 2012 WA No.1039 of 2012 WA No.1040 o14. 5.2013. Shri A.M.Trivedi, Sr.cousnel with Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra for the appellants. Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari for the respondents. This batch of appeals is arising out of common order dt.17.7.2012 passed by the writ court in WP No.5437/2006(S).WP No.11282/2006(S).WP No.13804/2005(S).WP No.15488/2005(S).WP No.15489/2005(S).WP No.15493/2005(S).WP No.15494/2005(S).WP No.15495/2005(S).WP NO.15496/2005(S) WP No.15498/2005(S).WP No.15500/2005(S).WP No.6626/2006(S).WP No.6627/2006(S).WP No.6628/2006(S) and WP No.7150/2006(S).The learned single Judge has found that the cancellation of the selection process for the post of Jail Warden, Central Jail, Rewa was fully justified as there were serious illegalities and regularities in the selection and while ...
Bhagwan Singh Rathore Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-2013
WA No.1003 of 2012 WA No.1004 of 2012 WA No.1015 of 2012 WA No.1016 of 2012 WA No.1017 of 2012 WA No.1018 of 2012 WA No.1019 of 2012 WA No.1028 of 2012 WA No.1029 of 2012 WA No.1030 of 2012 WA No.1038 of 2012 WA No.1039 of 2012 WA No.1040 o14. 5.2013. Shri A.M.Trivedi, Sr.cousnel with Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra for the appellants. Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari for the respondents. This batch of appeals is arising out of common order dt.17.7.2012 passed by the writ court in WP No.5437/2006(S).WP No.11282/2006(S).WP No.13804/2005(S).WP No.15488/2005(S).WP No.15489/2005(S).WP No.15493/2005(S).WP No.15494/2005(S).WP No.15495/2005(S).WP NO.15496/2005(S) WP No.15498/2005(S).WP No.15500/2005(S).WP No.6626/2006(S).WP No.6627/2006(S).WP No.6628/2006(S) and WP No.7150/2006(S).The learned single Judge has found that the cancellation of the selection process for the post of Jail Warden, Central Jail, Rewa was fully justified as there were serious illegalities and regularities in the selection and while ...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dr. Ramesh Chandra Dixit
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-2013
..1.. W.A.No.655/2012 & others HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR Writ Appeal No.655 of 2012 State of M.P. & another Vs. Dr.Ramesh Chandra Dixit Writ Appeal No.678 of 2012 State of M.P. & another Vs. Dr.Rashmi Tandon Mishra Writ Appeal No.539 of 2012 State of M.P. & another Vs. Dr.Siddharth H.Ganveer Writ Appeal No.601 of 2012 State of M.P. & another Vs. Dr.Smt.Sudha Kapoor Writ Appeal No.602 of 2012 State of M.P. & another Vs. Dr.Smt.Jaya Sharma Writ Appeal No.603 of 2012 State of M.P. & another Vs. Dr.Smt.Sanjana Sharma Writ Appeal No.604 of 2012 State of M.P. & another Vs. Dr.Kranti Vats Writ Appeal No.605 of 2012 State of M.P. & another ..2.. W.A.No.655/2012 & others Vs. Aalok K.Roy Writ Appeal No.606 of 2012 State of M.P. & another Vs. Jagdish Pal Singh Writ Appeal No.608 of 2012 State of M.P. & another Vs. Dr.Mrs. Namita Arya Writ Appeal No.609 of 2012 State of M.P. & another Vs. Chhotelal Prajapati Writ Appeal No.610 of 2012 State of M.P. & another Vs. Dr.Am...
Smt. Hemlata Shrivastava Vs. Sanjay Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2013
Smt. Hemlata Shrivastava versus Shri Sanjay Singh & Another Conc Case No :961. 13. 05.2013. Shri Sanjayram Tamrakar, counsel for the applicant. Shri S.S.Bisen, GA for the respondents. The applicant herein is working as teacher and the grievance of the applicant is that the benefits of 5th pay commissions recommendation as directed by this court is not being paid. The question has been decided in various cases and in W.P.No.2029/2000 (V.V.Asthana and others versus State of M.P.and others directions have been issued for granting the benefits and based on the order passed in the case of V.V.Asthana (supra) the petition of the applicant was also allowed and the respondents were directed to pay benefits of 5th Pay Commission recommendation to the applicant. not the grievance of the applicant is that the said benefit is not being granted even though order was passed in the year 2004/2005 Inter alia contending that the benefits accruing to the applicant by virtue of the acceptance of the 5th ...
Jagannath (Deceased) Th:lrs.,smt. Jaymanti Vs. Kaushal Prasad, (Deceas ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2013
Civil Revision No.197/2013 (Jagannath (dead) through L.Rs.Smt. Jaymanti and others versus Kaushal Prasad (dead) through L.Rs.Jagmohan and otheRs.13.05.2013 Heard Shri N.K.Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicants. This civil revision has been filed by the applicants being aggrieved by order dated 23.01.2013 passed in MJ.No.71/03 filed on 23.06.1997 by the respondents under order 9 rule 13 of the C.P.C.thereby setting aside the exparte judgment and decree dated 16.04.1996. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the court below has wrongly allowed the application filed by the respondents for setting aside the exparte judgment and decree dated 16.04.1996 without looking into the fact that the respondents did not take any steps in the matter within reasonable period of time and in such circumstances, the reason for condoning the delay and for setting aside the exparte judgment and decree is patently illegal and suffers from manifest irregularity. Having heard the ...
Smt. Renuka @ Megha Rawate Vs. Rupendra Rawate
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2013
M.C.C.No.409/2013 13-05-2013 Shri Deepak Awasthy, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Pramod Chaudhary, learned counsel for the respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. This application has been filed by the applicant under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for transfer of case H.M.No.6-A/2013 from the Court of FiRs.Additional District Judge, Balaghat to the competent Court at Jabalpur as the applicant has already instituted certain other proceedings against the respondent in Jabalpur. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that he has n o objection to the transfer of the case and submits that the application be allowed. In view of the aforesaid statements of the learned counsel for the respondent without entering into the merits of the case the application, is allowed and the case H.M.No.6-A/ 2013 pending before the Court of FiRs.Additional District Judge, Balaghat is directed to be transferred to the competent Court at Jabalpur. C.C.a...
The City Connector Tour and Travels Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2013
---1--- W.A.No.417/2013 13.5.2013 Shri Ashish Rawat, learned counsel for the appellants. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned Dy. Government Advocate for respondents/State. Shri V. Dubey, learned counsel for respondent No.3. This appeal is directed against the order dated 24.4.2013 passed in W.P.No.7278/2013, by which the writ petition preferred by Respondent No.3 was finally disposed of at the admission stage. The order dated 24.4.2013 reads as under :- An objection filed by the petitioner with regard to grant of temporary permit to Respondent Nos.3 & 4 is pending before Respondent No.2, as is evident from the documents brought on record. Keeping in view the aforesaid, for the present without entering into the controveRs.on merit, Respondent No.2 the Regional Transport Officer is directed to take note of the objection raised by the petitioner and then only proceed to grant permit to Respondent Nos.3 & 4. Before granting any further permit to Respondent Nos.3 & 4, decision on the objection sha...
Santosh Kumar Tamrakar Vs. Radheshyam Julaniya
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2013
Conc. No.35/2012 13/5/2013: Shri Vipin Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Chandrakant Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents. Keeping in view the compliance report submitted by the respondents and statement Annexure R/1 indicating payment of minimum of the pay scale to the petitioner and refund of the amount already recovered, for the present, no further action is required to be taken in the matter. However, in case petitioner has any further grievance still subsisting with regard to payment made, he may initiate fresh proceeding in accordance with law. With the aforesaid liberty to the petitioner, for the present, finding no case for initiating action for contempt, respondents are discharged from the proceeding and the application disposed of. (Rajendra Menon) Judge mrs.mishra...
Vigro Softech Limited, a 4/5, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mat ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2013
1...W.P.No.17685 of 2012 Virgo Softech Limited State of M.P.& otheRs.13.05.2013 Shri R.N.Singh, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Pancham Surana and Shri Parag Chaturvedi, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Agrawal, G.A.for the respondents. Shri Naman Nagrath, Learned Senior Advocate, Shri Sanjay Agrawal with Shri Qasim Ali, Counsel for the InterveneRs.Shri Sidharth Gupta, Counsel appears for the petitioner in W.P.21078/12 and W.P.No.20339/12 by filing PIL in the matter. I.A.No.14120/12 filed on behalf of the State for vacating ad interim writ issued on 12.10.2012. By an order dated 12.10.2012 in this matter, an ad interim writ was issued. For ready reference we quote the entire order which reads thus :- Heard on admission. The learned Deputy Advocate General takes notice of the petition and prays for a week's time to file reply. Prayer allowed. Also heard on interim relief. According to the petitioner, vide Agreement dated 28.7.2011 the State Government through Department of Food,...
Onkar Prasad Tripathi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. Writ Petition No.290/2013(S) Onkar Prasad Tripathi Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.Writ Petition No.13396/2012(S) S.K.Gautam Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.Writ Petition No.13303/2012(S) Jugal Kishore Baghel Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.Writ Petition No.13481/2012(S) Vivek Kumar Saxena Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.Writ Petition No.13489/2012(S) Sharad Kumar Pandey Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.Writ Petition No.13610/2012(S) Radheshyam Nagraj Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.2 Writ Petition No.14030/2012(S) P.D.Meshram Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.Writ Petition No.14576/2012(S) G.L.Maravi Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.Writ Petition No.260/2013(S) Achhelal Verma Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.Writ Petition No.292/2013(S) Bhupat Singh Gaud Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.Writ Petition No.321/2013(S) Gend Singh Saiyam Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.Writ Petition No.331/2013(S) Tara Chand Dubey Vs The State of M.P.and otheRs.3 Writ Petition No.42...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »