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.
Shreya Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
W.P.NO.19720/2012 22-07-2013 Shri Praveen Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner.Shri S.P.Rai, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent no.1. Shri Mahendra Pateriya, learned counsel for respondent no.2, Shri Madhur Shukla on behalf of Shri A.P.Shukla, learned counsel for respondent no.3. Challenging the order dated 09-11-2012, passed by the Registrar, Barkatullah University, Bhopal, preventing the petitioner from appearing in Bachelor of Homeopathy Medicine and Surgery (BHMS).fiRs.year course, for the academic session 2011-12, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.The petitioner appeared in the Pre-Ayurvedic Homeopathic and Unani, Naturopathy and Yoga Test, 2011, conducted by the M.P.Professional Examination Board, Bhopal. The counseling was held on 19-09-2011 and based on the merit of the petitioner in the entrance examination, the petitioner was granted admission in BHMS New CouRs.in the institute of respondent no.3. While prosecuting the studies in the fiRs.year when the petitio...
Puspraj Dubey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
Cr.A.No.2444/2012 22.7.13 As per B.D.Rathi,J Shri Abhishek Singh, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Amit Pandey, Government Advocate for the respondent no.1-State. Heard on admission. This appeal has been preferred under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code.) being aggrieved with the judgment dated 14/9/12 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court).Tahsil Beohari, District Shahdol in Sessions Trial No.131/10, whereby respondent Nos.2 to 9 have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 342/149, 323/149 and 436/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC. for short).Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 1/4/2010 at about 10-11 p.m., respondent Nos.2 to 9 constituted an un-lawful assembly and in furtherance of their common object, not only roped and wrongfully confined Pushpraj Dubey, who was sleeping outside his house, but also assaulted him and set fire to his house. The incident was witnessed by Raghuraj Singh, Shobhna...
Dharmadeep Choubey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
W.P.No.10729/2013 (Dharmadeep Choubey versus State of MP and otheRs.22.07.2013 Heard Shri J. Arya, 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 the petitioner is not being permitted to participate in the counselling that is being held by the authority for making appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shiksha Grade-II. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has completed his B.Ed. CouRs.and result thereof has been declared 06.06.2013 during the couRs.of proceedings for counselling and in such circumstances, the petitioner be permitted to participate in the same as the petitioner after obtaining B.Ed. Degree has become eligible for the same. On a specific query being made by this court, the learned counsel for the petitioner admits that on the date of filing of application which was prescribed, the petitioner did not possess necessary qua...
Ramgarib Patel Vs. Vijay Kumar Patel @ Doctor
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
Cr.A.No.2671/2011 22.7.13 As per B.D.Rathi,J Shri G.R.Saket, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Vijay Pandey, Deputy Advocate General for the respondent no.2-State. Heard on admission. This appeal has been preferred under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code.) being aggrieved with the judgment passed by VII Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa on 30/9/2011 in Sessions Trial No.9/2011, whereby respondent No.1 has been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC. for short).Prosecution case, in brief, is that in the night of 12/11/10 at about 10.30 p.m., respondent no.1 entered into the room of prosecutrix and subjected her to sexual assault. As she raised alarm, neighbours Navneet Patel and Rajesh Patel reached there, and respondent no.1, after threatening her to kill, fled. Prosecutrix was being sexually exploited by respondent no.1 for the last three months. Her husband was a military personnel, ...
Lekhram Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
1 W.P.1553/2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No.1553 of 2013 SINGLE BENCH: JUSTICE A.K.SHRIVASTAVA Petitioner : Lekhram S/o Shri Durag Singh R/o Gram Jova, Tahsil Ghansor, District Seoni, M.P.-Versus- RespondentS:1. State of Madhya Pradesh Through Secretary, Department of Revenue, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal, M.P.2. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Seoni, M.P.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Petitioner by - Shri Vipin Yadav, Advocate. Respondents by Shri Anubhav Jain, Panel Lawyer ORDER ( 22/07/2013) For the reasons stated in the order passed today in W.P.No.1911/2013 (Jalam versus State of M.P.and another).this petition is also allowed. The impugned order dated 05.10.2012 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Ghansor, District Seoni Annexure P/3 is hereby quashed. No costs. (A.K.Shrivastava) Judge rao 2 W.P.1553/2013...
Subhash Pandey Vs. Shri Vivek Agrawal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
Subhash Pandey & ORS.versus Vivek Agrawal & ORS.Conc. No ::1429. 19. 07.2013. Shri A.K.Gupta, learned counsel for the applicants. Shri A.K.Chourasiya, learned counsel for the respondents. From the reply filed by respondents and order passed on 28.2.2013, Annexure R-3, it is seen that orders have been passed for payment of earned leave to the extent of 120 days to each of the petitioneRs.That being so, for the present, without proceeding further in the matter, respondents are directed to ensure that monetary benefits accruing to petitioners by virtue of order Annexure R-3 on 28.2.2013 be given to petitioners within one month from today, if not already done. With the aforesaid, for the present, this application stands disposed of. (RAJENDRA MENON) (SMT. VIMLA JAIN) JUDGE JUDGE ss/-...
Mohd. Sadique Khan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
W.P.No.11979 / 2013 (Mohd. Sadique Khan & ors..Vs..State of M.P.& ORS.22-07-2013 Shri Adwait Fouadar, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri S.M.Lal, learned G.A.for the State/respondents. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioneRs.who have obtained degrees through Distant Education Centres in the State of Madhya Pradesh that have been issued by Vinayaka Missions University, Salem and The Global Open University, Nagaland, have filed this petition being aggrieved by the order dated 17-7-2009 and the petitioners have relied upon the order passed by Gwalior Bench of this Court in W.P.No.3290/2012 (Manot Sharma & others versus State of Madhya Pradesh & otheRs.dated 29-8-2012, wherein it has been held that the UGC regulations are prospective. This Court, by a detailed order dated 27-9-2012 passed in the case of Smt. Rashmi Rajak versus Union of India and otheRs.reported in 2012 (4) MPLJ 680 has considered the law as well as the decision of Gwalior Bench and the Supreme Court in t...
Gulab Singh Choudhary Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
1 W.P.No.12348/2011 22/07/2013 Shri Rahul Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard. Petitioner a resident of village Khamariya, Janpad Panchayat, Lalbarra, District Balaghat has filed this petition seeking direction to respondent No.2 Collector, Balaghat to initiate proceedings against respondent No.5 and 6 under Section 40 of M.P.Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam and take action there against. Respondents No.5 and 6 respectively are Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Khamariya, Janpad Panchayat Lalbarra, District Balaghat and Secretary, Janpad Panchayat, Lalbarra, District Balaghat. Their against the petitioner had lodged complaint in respect of certain illegalities and irregularities committed by them regarding NAREGA. The complaint led to an enquiry wherein it was found:1. Hkq l hZ j ke ds ?.kj ls es u jks M fuekZ . k es a rduhdh tka p vuq l kj 28 cks j h lhes a V dk vf/kd fcy yxk;k 2 W.P.No.12348/2011 x;k gS A 2.cks j h lhes a V gh jkf'k 245@& :i;s iz f r cks j h dh nj ls d...
M/S Kutch Brine Chem Industries Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR W.P. No.8815/2013 M/s Kutch Brine Chem Industries Vs. State of M.P. & another Present: Honble Shri Rajendra Menon, J.& Hon'ble Mrs. Vimla Jain, J.______________________________________________________ Shri Siddharth Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R. D. Jain, learned Advocate General with Shri Shobhit Aditya, for the respondents. __________________________________________________ ORDER ( 2272013 ) Per : Shri Rajendra Menon, J.Challenging certain conditions enumerated in a notice inviting tender issued by the M.P. State Civil Supply Corporation on 20 th April, 2013, petitioner has filed this writ petition.2. Petitioner claims to be a duly registered partnership firm engaged in the business of processing , manufacturing, sale and supply of Refined Iodized Salt (herein after referred as "RIS"). It is said that the petitioner's firms is currently supplying the said RIS salt to large number of private and multinatio...
Hripal Yadav Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-2013
1 Hripal Yadav versus Union of India and others.W.P. No.17248/12 22/07/13 Shri K.K.Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.S.Siddiqui, learned Assistant Solicitor General for the Union of India and the respondent department. Petitioner who is a retired employee and was working in the Grey Iron Foundry, Jabalpur has filed this writ petition challenging the order Annexure P-6 dated 29/08/12 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur whereby certain grievance of the petitioner in the matter of commutation of pension has been rejected. Petitioner retired from the service of the department on 30th June, 2001. He was sanctioned pension and commutation of part of his pension in accordance with the rule. Thereafter, making certain grievance with regard to payment of pension and its commutation and contending that the qualifying service of more than 39 years and 1 month is not properly worked out for the purpose of fixation of pension, representation was submitted by the...
- ‹ Prev
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- Next ›
- Last »