Madhya Pradesh Court July 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.
Ku. Parnee Dwivedi Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2013
Ku. Parnee Dwivedi versus Union of India & ORS.Writ Petition No ::11420. 23. 07.2013. Shri V.K., Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.S.Siddiqui, learned Assistant Solicitor General, for respondents. Keeping in view the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner, to the effect that petitioner has not being granted admission in National Law University, Bhopal, where the petitioner is interested in taking admission. In case petitioner wants refund of fees already deposited with Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur, the petitioner may submit an application in this regard to the Registrar of said University, Raipur and the Registrar shall consider and decide refund of fees in accordance to rules within a period of one month. With the aforesaid, for the present, considering the fact that petitioner is granted admission in Bhopal, this petition is disposed of, as having been rendered infructuous. Certified copy as per rules. (RAJENDRA MENON) (SMT. VIMLA JAIN) ...
Smt. Indrani Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2013
W.P.No.11799/2013 Smt. Indrani Tiwari vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 23.07.2013 Heard Shri S. Mukerjee, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the select list dated 8.10.2012 by the Chief Medical and Health Officer, Balaghat proposing to make appointment of Asha Sahyogi. It is submitted that the said selection has been under taken by the respondents without following the procedure prescribed by law and without issuing any advertisement thereby depriving and precluding the petitioner from participating in the process. Apparently, the matter requires to be looked into by the Collector, Balaghat and in such circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner approaches the respondent no.3 Collector, Balaghat by filing a representation within fifteen days from today alongwith a copy of the order passed today and a ...
Liyakat Khan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2013
W.P.No.11739/2013 Liyakat Khan vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 23.07.2013 Heard Shri R. Pandey, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 4.4.2013 by which the petitioner who is a Driver in the office of the Zila Panchayat Betul has been transferred to Janpad Panchayat Prabhatpattan in District Betul as well as order dated 27.6.2013 by which the petitioner's representation has been rejected. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that previously the petitioner had filed W.P No.8705/2013(S) challenging the order of transfer which was disposed of on 10.5.2013 with a direction to decide the representation filed by the petitioner pursuant to which the respondents have considered the case of the petitioner for cancelling the order of transfer and have thereafter passed order dated 27.6.2013 rejecting his representation and affirming the order of transfer. It is...
Omkar Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2013
W.P.No.11769/2013 Omkar Patel vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 23.07.2013 Heard Shri Brijesh Dubey, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the appointment of respondent no.4 on the post of contract Pharmacist at Primary Health Centre, Satguwan Pathariya, District Damoh, on the ground that the petitioner is infact more meritorious but his certificate showing his experience in a Government institution has deliberately been removed from the record with the sole intention of giving benefit to respondent no.4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has filed a representation before the respondent authorities on 9.4.2013 and 30.5.2013 but the authorities have not considered the same till date and, therefore, they be directed to do so. Shri S.M.Lal, the learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent/State, on advance copy, submits that the represent...
Ram Prakash Yadav Vs. KThe M.P.Electricity Board/Mppkvv Co.Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2013
W.P.No.11774/2013 Ram Prakash Yadav vs. M.P. State Electricity Board & ORS.1 23.07.2013 Heard Shri P.S.Gaharwar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment in lieu of the fact that the petitioner's father, while working as Lineman, died while in service on 30.5.2001. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has filed an application seeking compassionate appointment on 13.11.2002 and 30.11.2002 but the same has not been considered till date and, therefore, appropriate direction be issued to the respondent authorities. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is observed that by order dated 29.1.2002, Annexure P-7, the respondent authorities had imposed an absolute ban on compassionate appointment with effect from 1.9....
Madhav Pd. Chourasia Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-23-2013
W.P.No.11318/2013 (M.P.Chourasiya versus State of MP and otheRs.23.07.2013 Heard Shri Praveen Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. Though several issues have been raised by the petitioner in the present petition, after arguing for a while, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present petition be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation filed by the petitioner dated 04.05.2011. In view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner without entering into the merits of the case or making any comments on the entitlement of the petitioner, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that on the petitioner furnishing a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition before the authority concerned within 15 days from today, he shall consider and decide the petitioner's representation expediti...
Manohar Hedau Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
W.P.No.11911/2013 Manohar Hedau vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 22.07.2013 Heard Shri Vipin Yadav, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 29.6.2013 by which the earlier order of posting of the petitioner dated 27.4.2013 has been modified and the petitioner's place of posting has been changed from Development Officer, Horticulture, Dindori to the Tikamgarh. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had also executed the previous order dated 27.4.2013 which is being modified within two months which indicates total non-application of mind inasmuch as the petitioner has already got his children admitted and is settled at Dindori but is being uprooted within two months. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a representation before the respondent authorities on 30.6.2013 which has not been considered. In ...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Arif
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
Misc. Criminal Case No.468/2011 22.7.13 As per B.D.Rathi,J Shri S.K.Kashyap, Government Advocate for the applicant- State. Heard on admission. This is an application for grant of leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code. for short) against the acquittal the respondents, viz. Arif, Shahid Miya and Rijwan Khan, of the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420 read with 120B, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC.).The impugned judgment dated 29/9/10 was passed by II Additional Judge to the Court of I Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Sessions Trial No.699/09. Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned Government Advocate, we have gone through the impugned judgment, whereby the respondents have been acquitted as indicated above. As per the prosecution story, during the period intervening 19/2/08 to 27/3/08, in furtherance of a conspiracy to embezzle the relief amount awarded to gas victiMs.respondents, by produci...
M.P. Karmchari Congress Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
W.P.No.12275/2013 22/7/2013: Shri Rajesh Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned Govt.Adv.for the respondents. Considering the fact that similar petition filed W.P.No.11238/2013 dated 9.7.2013 has been dismissed by this Court, we see no reason to interfere into the matter. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to take up the matter with the State Government or Board concerned and it is for the Board to consider the grievance of the petitioner. Accordingly, with the aforesaid liberty to the petitioner, for the present, finding no case for interference, this petition is disposed of. (Rajendra Menon) (MRS.Vimla Jain) Judge Judge mrs.mishra...
Jaypal Jhade Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
W.P.No.11684/2013 Jaypal Jhade vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 22.07.2013 Heard Shri Santosh Meshram, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the fact that he is being denied appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Class-III at Mouganj District Rewa on the ground that the name of his father has wrongly been mentioned as Suresh in the marksheet of Samvida Shala Shikshak, Grade-3, Eligibility Test Result, 2011 issued by the M.P.Professional Examination Board, Bhopal, though his name is Surapchand Jhade. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was selected for the aforesaid post and his name has been mentioned at Serial No.56 in the select list, inspite of which he is not being permitted to join. It is further submitted that the mistake, if any, has occurred in the marksheet issued by the Vyapam which would not disqualify the petitioner as h...
- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »