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.
Ritesh Kumar Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
Ritesh Kumar Panday versus State of M.P.& Others Writ Petition No ::16242. 19. 07.2013. None for the petitioner. Shri Amit Seth, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent No.1/ State. Shri Vibhudhendra Mishra, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 & 4. Petitioner had filed this writ petition in the year 2010 and even though no challenge was made to any specific order, but direction was sought for to the respondent No.2, the Director of Technical Education, to conduct special examination as per provisions of ordinance governing grant of degree for the Bachelor of Business Administration. It is pointed out by Shri Vibhudhendra Mishra, learned counsel that vide order dated 19.1.2011 the said special examination has ordered and, therefore, not this petition is rendered infructuous. Taking note of aforesaid, the petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. (RAJENDRA MENON) (A.K.SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE ss/-...
Satish Kumar Verma Vs. the State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
Writ Petition No.2214/2005 19.7.2013 Petitioner in person. Respective counsel for the respondents and some of the interveners are also present. In the present Public Interest Litigation filed in the year 2005 grievance has been made that unauthorized religious structures have been illegally constructed on public lands including public roads within the municipal limits of Jabalpur and this Court vide order dated 9.12.2005 already directed the district authorities (arraigned as respondents) to remove such religious structures, particularly from public roads, and keep on reporting compliance from time to time once in every month by an affidavit of the Collector, Jabalpur. It is to be noted that while making such direction, following observation was made: While construction of religious structures on public roads do create a lot of inconvenience to the general public, removal of such structures has to be done very carefully without hurting the sentiments of the religious groups. Hence, suc...
Balmik Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
W.P.No.11539 / 2013 (Balmik Singh ..Vs..State of MP & otheRs.19-07-2013 Shri S.K.Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.M.Lal, learned panel lawyer for the State/respondents. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that the authorities, in spite of appointing the petitioner on 6-7-2012 are not permitting him to perform his duties or joining, therefore, the respondent/authorities be directed to do so. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and after a perusal of the petition it is observed that by order dated 6-7-2012 (Annexure P-2) the petitioner was engaged on daily wages. The petitioner has himself stated in the petition that pursuant to the order he only worked for ten days and thereafter he has been disengaged. In the circumstances as the petitioner was engaged on daily wages and worked only for ten days and that the petitioner has not placed any statutory provision or rule conferring any right upon the petitioner...
Satish Kumar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
W.P.No.11510 / 2013 (Satish Kumar & others ..Vs..State of MP & otheRs.19-07-2013 Shri K.K.Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Akash Chaudhary, learned panel lawyer for the State/respondents. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioners have filed this petition claiming absorption on the post of contract teacher Class-III alongwith consequential benefits on the strength of circulars issued by the State Government dated 23-12-1994 (Annexure P-2) and dated 12-4-1996 (Annexure P-3) wherein it is provided that such benefits be awarded to the persons who have been appointed on compassionate ground by giving them exemption from obtaining B.Ed. and B.T.I.Degree. The petitioners claim that similar benefit has been granted to one Shri Vikas Tripathi and Shri Jitendra Kumar Gart and, therefore, the similar benefits be extended to the petitioners also. From a perusal of the petition it is observed that the petitioners have directly approached this Court without approaching th...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Ravi Prakash Dixit
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
1 W.A.No.573/2013 W.A.No.574/2013 W.A.No.575/2013 W.A.No.576/2013, W.A.No.577/2013 19.7.2013 Shri Kumaresh Pathak, Dy.A.G.for appellants. Shri Manot Chansoriya, Counsel for respondents. As common question of law based on common facts is involved in W.A.No.573/2013-State of M.P.& others versus Rambabu Awasthi & otheRs.W.A.No.574/2013-State of M.P.& others versus Ravi Prakash Dixit, W.A.No.575/2013-State of M.P.& another versus Ramchandra Gangele, W.A.No.576/2013-State of M.P.& others versus Basharatulla Beg and W.A.No.577/2013- State of M.P.& another versus Salim Khan & otheRs.all the matters are being heard and decided analogously. As there is delay also in filing these appeals, prayer made in the application seeking condonation of delay is allowed. The delay in filing all the appeals is condoned. Learned counsel appearing for appellants submits that in the present case, the writ Court has directed for appointment of respondents on the post of LDC in terms of order passed by the M.P.St...
Arjun Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
M. Cr.C.No.7756/13 19/07/13 Shri Ghanshyam Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned Govt. Adv.for the State. Applicant Arjun Singh has been arrested in Crime No.114/08 for offences U/s 307 and 302/34 of I.P.C. The bail applications have been rejected on merit by this Court. However, on the ground that he is suffering from epilepsy and wanted to undergo treatment, bail on medical ground was sought for. This was permitted by this Court and it is seen that since 23/01/12 after orders were passed in M. Cr.C.No.13865/11, the applicant had been on bail on various occasions. The bail to him has been extended from time to time. Now, from a period of one year, he is on bail on medical ground and extension of bail is sought for on medical ground on the ground that applicant is undergoing treatment in Apollo Hospital, New Delhi and, therefore, the temporary bail granted be extended. I have gone through the medical evidence and documents available on record and it is...
Brijlal Vs. Shri M.L. Ladia
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
-1- C.P.No.1230/2013 19/7/2013 Shri A.K.Pare, learned counsel for the petitioner. Alleging willful disobedience of order dated 8.2.2013 passed in W.P.No.12448/2005(S) present contempt petition has been filed. Writ petition No.12448/2005(s) was disposed of on following terMs.After taking into consideration the submissions put forth by learned counsel for the petitioner and instead of dwelling with aspect as to whether the respondents could be solely held responsible for delay in settlement of dispute in view of clause 9 of the promotion order dated 26.6.1996 cause of justice would be sub served if the petitioner is given an opportunity to raise the dispute before the departmental authorities who would examine the matter and after taking into consideration the factual aspect shall decide the same within a period of 60 days from the date of communication of this order. Thus apparently the petitioner was given an opportunity to file a representation before the authorities concern who were ...
Rajendra Kumar Kurmi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
W.P.No.11555 / 2013 (Rajendra Kumar Kurmi ..Vs..State of MP & otheRs.19-07-2013 Shri L.C.Chourasia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Akash Chaudhary, learned panel lawyer for the State/respondents. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the fact that the petitioner is not being permitted to participate in the counselling being conducted for making appointments on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak, Grade-III though the petitioner is over qualified having obtained a B.Ed. degree. Similar petitions wherein the petitioners have raised the same issue, have been dismissed by this Court in the cases of Sanyogita Thakur and others v. State of M.P.and otheRs.reported in 2013 (2) MPLJ 20 and W.P.No.6129/2013 (S).decided on 15-4-2013 and in the circumstances this petition being identical, the same is also dismissed. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the case of Sanyogita Thakur (supra) this Court has ma...
Rahul Yadav Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
Rahul Yadav versus Union of India and another.W.P. No.8707/13 19/07/13 Shri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.S.Siddiqui, learned Assistant Solicitor General for the Union of India. Challenging the order dated 25/03/13 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench in O.A.No.242/09 dismissing an application filed by the applicant for grant of compassionate appointment, this writ petition has been filed. Petitioner's father Shri Ram Sewak Yadav was working as a 'Majdoor' in the establishment of Garrison Engineer (West).Jabalpur. He died in harness on 15/01/99. The application submitted by the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment was rejected vide order dated 22/09/02 and the petitioner was informed that the Board of officers found that petitioner's father died on 15/01/99 more than 13 years and 8 months back and as the claim has been examined as per the policy and it is found that the claim is not tenable, the application was rejected. ...
Takhat Singh Lodhi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
W.P.No.11501/2013 (Takhat Singh and another versus State of MP and otheRs.19.07.2013 Heard Shri S. Raghuwnshi, learned counsel for the petitioners on the question of admission and Shri Rahul Rawat, learned panel lawyer for the State on advance copy. The petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved by the fact that the petitioners have not been called for selection for appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III although the petitioners have cleared the eligibility test and possesses D.Ed. Degree. Similar petitions wherein the petitioners have raised the same issue, have been dismissed by this Court in the cases of Sanyogita Thakur and others v. State of M.P.and otheRs.reported in 2013 (2) MPLJ 20 and W.P.No.6129/2013 (S).decided on 15-4-2013 and in the circumstances this petition being identical, the same is also dismissed. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the case of Sanyogita Thakur (supra) this Court has made certain observatio...
- ‹ Prev
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- Next ›
- Last »