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.
Satish Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. Writ Petition No.3328/2012 (s) Satish Shrivastava Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another PRESENT : Honble Shri Justice K.K. Trivedi. J.Smt. Shobha Menon, learned Senior counsel assisted by Shri C.A. Thomas, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Amit Kumar Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State. ORDER (18.07.2013) The petitioner a retired Member Judge of Industrial Court, M.P. has approached this Court by way of filing this petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, ventilating his grievance against the recovery order dated 28.06.2011 and also claiming the benefit of proper fixation of pension after the release of DA w.e.f. 01.04.2004 on the grounds that the petitioner was initially appointed in the Labour Judiciary under the provisions of M.P. Industrial Relations Act, 1961 and the 2 Rules made in the year 1965. In terms of the decisions taken by the respondents/State, after deciding certain writ petitions and after...
Ku. Roopal JaIn Vs. the Jabalpur Engineering College
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
W.P.No.12276/2013 18/07/2013 Shri Anshuman Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Shreyash Pandit, learned counsel for Respondent No.2. Shri Neeraj Prakash Rai, learned counsel for Respondent No.3. Respondent Nos.2 & 3 have orally made statement with regard to the steps taken by them for taking the viva test in the respondent's institute and declaration of the result. Prima-facie, it seems that the petitioner would loose one year because of the fault committed by Respondent No.3 and even loose her right to admission in the seat, which has been allocated to her in the counselling already held. Keeping in view the same, respondents are directed not to allot the seat already to the petitioner, to any other person without leave of this Court or till the next date of listing. The seat shall remain to be shown as alloted to the petitioner and counselling for this seat shall not be initiated without leave of this Court. Let the reply in this regard be filed by Respondent Nos.2 and 3 ...
Dr. Manoj Raje Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
W.P.No.8957/2013 18/07/2013 Shri Basant Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned Government Advocate on advance notice for Respondents/State. Challenging the action of the respondents in directing to with comply with the requirement of serving the State of M.P.as contemplated in the bond submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure-P1 or to deposit the amount indicated in the bond, this writ petition has been filed. Petitioner was admitted to a Post Graduate couRs.in medical after certain examination and entrance test conducted. The examination and the entrance test was conducted in accordance with rule namely Madhya Pradesh Medical & Dental Treatment Post Graduate CouRs.Entrance Examination Rule, 2011 and in accordance with the rule, it was contemplated that every students admitted to the Course, shall give a bond for serving in the State of M.P.for the period of three years or pay the amount indicated in the bond in lieu thereof. Accordingly, petitioner a...
Parmanand Morya Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. Writ Petition No.24255/2003 (O.A. No.432/1999) Parmanand Mourya Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others. PRESENT : Honble Shri Justice K.K. Trivedi. J.Shri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Lalit Joglekar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State. ORDER (18 .07.2013) This petition was filed as Original Application before the M.P. Administrative Tribunal Bench at Bhopal, in the year 1999 seeking a direction against the respondents to consider the claim of petitioner pursuant to making of the M.P. Pay Revision Rules, 1998, and to grant him the appropriate pay scale. Since the representation was not being considered, the petitioner has approached the Tribunal. After closer of the Tribunal, the petition is transmitted to this Court 2 and is registered as writ petition.2. Despite the fact that the petition was entertained by the Tribunal, notices were issued and served on the respondents, no return was filed by the responden...
Sukhchayan Prasad Shukla Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
W.P.No.11419 / 2013 (Sukhchayan Prasad Shukla ..Vs..State of MP & otheRs.18-07-2013 Shri V.K.Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Akash Chaudhary, learned panel lawyer for the State/respondents. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition claiming parity with one Ram Prasad Tiwari and Ramesh Kumar Pandey, who have been appointed on the post of Assistant Grade- III. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said two persons have been appointed alongwith the petitioner in the contingency establishment and have subsequently been appointed as Assistant Grade-III, therefore, the same treatment be granted to the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner's representation claiming the aforesaid benefit is pending before the authority and no decision thereon has been taken by the authority till date. The learned counsel fairly states that he is not in a position to place any statutory rules before this Cou...
Lakhan Singh Gurjar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
W.P.No.11413/2013 (Lakhan Singh Gurjar & ORS.versus State of MP & Ors.) 18.07.2013 Heard Shri S.K.Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the petitioners on the question of admission and interim relief. By filing the present petition the petitioneRs.who are working as Guruji, submit that their case be disposed of in the light of and in terms of the order passed by a Division Bench of this court in the case of Gopal Chawla and others versus State of MP and otheRs.decided on 15.12.2010 in W.A.No.596/10. The aforesaid order has been quoted in the order passed by this court in W.P.No.5660/13(S) decided on 10.04.2013. Looking to the fact that the directions in the case of Gopal Chawla (supra) appear to be general in nature, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the State Government in terms of and in the light of the order passed in the case of Gopal Chawla (supra) by filing a representation. With the aforesaid liberty, the petition filed by the petitioners stands...
Mamta Shukla Vs. Rajiv Shukla
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
F.A.No.32/1997 18/7/2013: Shri M.L.Jaiswal, learned Senior Counsel with Shri K.K.Gautam, for the appellant. Shri Mrigendra Singh with Shri Amit Khatri, learned counsel for respondent. This is an appeal filed by the appellant wife under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act challenging the judgment and decree for dissolution of marriage granted on 17.12.96 by the Vth Additional District Judge, Rewa in Civil Suit No.19A/95. Respondent-husband filed the suit in question for dissolution of marriage mainly on the ground of adultery and desertion. It was alleged that the appellant herein is living in adultery and she has also deserted the husband. The appellant appeared before the Trial Court and denied the grounds of adultery and pointed out that the husband is of unsound mind and pleading insanity it was alleged that grounds raised by him are not correct. It was also pointed out that during the pendency of trial, husband has got married and is not living separately with another woman. Both ...
Kaliram Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Revision No.384/2013 Kaliram and another. VERSUS The State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Vikas Sharma, counsel for the applicants. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 18th day of July 2013) The applicants were convicted for the offence punishable under section 325/34 and 323/34 of IPC and each sentenced for 3 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- and 6 months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- respectively by the learned JMFC (Shri Amit Ranjan Samadhiya), Amarwada, District Chhindwara in criminal case No.974/2010 vide judgment dated 20.6.2012. In criminal appeal No.224/2012 vide judgment dated 13.2.2013, the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Amarwada, District Chhindwara ...
Gondia Pawar Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. Writ Petition No.13140/2003 (O.A.No.3212/98) Gondia Pawar. Vs State of M.P.and otheRs.PRESENT : Honble Shri Justice K.K.Trivedi.J.Shri D.K.Dixit, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Amit Kumar Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for respondents. ORDER (18.7.2013) This petition was original filed as Original Application in the M.P.Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, which has been transmitted to this Court and is registered as writ petition after closure of the Tribunal. 2: The grievance of the petitioner is that when he made a complaint with respect to illegal appointment of respondent No.4 before the competent authority and categorically contended that the respondent No.4 was appointed initially as a Cleaner, was not having the requisite qualification to be appointed on the post of Stenot but was appointed as such at the behest of one Joint Director of Agriculture, who was posted at the said place, the proper enquiry was not conducted and a report...
Santosh Kumar Singhai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
1 CRIMINAL REVISION NO.674/2013. 18.07.2013. Shri Wajid Hyder, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri R. S. Siddiqui, learned Assistant Solicitor General for the respondent/CBI. This case is listed today for further orders but in the available circumstances with the consent of the parties the same is heard finally.1. Petitioner/ accused No.3 has filed this revision under Section 397/401 of Cr. P. C. being aggrieved by the order dated 19.3.2013 passed by the Special Judge, (CBI), Jabalpur in Misc. Criminal Case No.05/2012, whereby his application dated 7.3.2013 (Ann. P.3) for returning the original warehouse's receipt of 360 bags of Chana has been dismissed.2. The applicant's counsel after taking us through the averments of revision memo along with the application and the impugned order argued that in the lack of such original receipt the applicant is not in a position to get back his goods from the concerning warehouse and if such receipt is not made available to him then not only the...
- ‹ Prev
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- Next ›
- Last »