Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
Ram Bhuvan Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
1 W.P.No.13788/2013 (PIL) Ram Bhuvan Pandey State of M.P.& others 20.8.2013 Shri Jagdish Singrol, Counsel for petitioner. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, GA for State of M.P.Shri Tiwari prays further two weeks time to tile reply. Prayer is allowed. Ad interim writ It is submitted by the petitioner that the respondents are dispossessing the villagers who are belonging to scheduled castes and settled on the land which is shown as Itai Talab. It is submitted that till hearing of the matter, they may not be thrust out from the possession of the land where they are settled since long. Considering aforesaid, till next date of hearing, it is directed that status-quo as on today in respect of the lands, which are shown in Annexure P/1, be maintained by both parties. Be listed for hearing in the second week of September, 2013. C.C.as per rules. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Subhash Kakade) Acting Chief Justice Judge C....
Adarsh Balak Mandir Vs. the State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
W.P.NO.1827/2004 20.08.2013 Shri P.R.Bhave, learned Senior Counsel with Shri L.N.Sakle, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri V.S.Shroti, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Vikram Johari, learned Counsel for respondents. The present petition is in respect of 1.97 acres of land bearing plot Nos.237, 238 and 239 of Harda town, in Harda tehsil, District Hoshangabad, wherefor the petitioner seeks mandamus that the respondents be directed not to dispossess the petitioner from the land being in his occupation and to issue a writ in the nature of prohibition restricting the respondents from carrying out the construction over the land in question. When the matter is taken up today, it is stated by learned counsel for the respondents that issue raised in this petition, the petitioner had preferred a Civil Suit: Civil Suit No.19-A/2012 before FiRs.Additional District Judge, Harda, instituted on 03.06.2005. It is urged that the said civil suit was filed for declaration of title and for permanent...
Smt. Saroj Soni Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. Writ Petition No.14315/2011 Smt. Saroj Soni Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others. PRESENT : Honble Shri Justice K.K. Trivedi. Shri Sunil Choubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State. ORDER (20.08.2013) The grievance of the petitioner is that after granting second Kramonnati since her pay was fixed in a higher pay scale, on account of grant of regular promotion the petitioner could not be denied the higher pay scale. Since she was found fit for grant of promotion, she should have been promoted in a next higher pay scale which has not been done and despite making recommendations by the Joint Director Public Instructions, Jabalpur, since the claim of the petitioner is not being considered, she is required to approach this Court. It is contended that the petitioner who was initially appointed as Lower Division Teacher (hereinafter referred to as Assistant Teacher) o27. 09.19...
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and ors. Vs. Smt.Susheela Prasad and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
W.P.NO.1974/1998 & W.P.No.13440/2004 20/8/2013: Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Akash Choudhary, learned counsel for respondents in W.P.No.1974/1998. Shri Gourav Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents in W.P.13440/2004. Challenging the order dated 13.11.1997 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur in various cases directing the petitioner department to consider the claim of the respondents herein for regularization, these writ petitions have been filed. Respondents were engaged as Data Entry Operators and while so working they raised the claim for regularization. It was their contention that they are working continuously since 1995 and therefore, they are entitled for regularization. When the matter was being adjudicated before the Central Administrative Tribunal, the department came out with a case that the respondents were engaged as piece rated employees, were paid remuneration in accordance to the work performed by them...
Ashok Kumar JaIn Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
1 W.P. No.5044/2000 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE A.K.SHRIVASTAVA Writ Petition No.5044 / 2000 PETITIONER : Ashok Kumar Jain, S/o. Late Shri Ratanlal Jain, R/o. 27 Lakherapura, Bhopal (M.P.) Versus RESPONDENTS:1. Board of Revenue Gwalior, Through its Registrar, 2. The Collector of Stamps and District Registrar, Bhopal.3. The Sub Registrar, Bhopal 4. Housing Board, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal through its Housing Commissioner, 5. The Estate Officer of Housing Board Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Petitioner by Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. Respondents No.1 to 3 by Shri Vivek Agrawal, Deputy Advocate General. None for respondents no.4 and 5. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (20.08.2013) By this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution 2 W.P. No.5044/2000 of India, the petitioner is chal...
Y.P.Rai Vs. M.P.State Electricity Board
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR WRIT PETITION No.15515/2006 Y.P. Rai Vs. Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board & others ____________________________________________________________ Present : Honble Shri Justice K.K. Trivedi ____________________________________________________________ Shri K.N. Pethia, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Anoop Nair, learned Counsel for respondents No.1 and 2. ____________________________________________________________ ORDER (20/08/2013) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 27.12.2004 by which the persons said to be junior to the petitioner, have been promoted on the post of Additional Chief Engineer (T&D), contending inter alia that the petitioner was denied the benefit of promotion only because the vacancies, which occurred on the aforesaid post before coming into force of the amendment made in the Regulations prescribing consideration for promotion, were filled in by consider...
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and ors Vs. Ku.Leena JaIn and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
W.P.NO.1974/1998 & W.P.No.13440/2004 20/8/2013: Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Akash Choudhary, learned counsel for respondents in W.P.No.1974/1998. Shri Gourav Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents in W.P.13440/2004. Challenging the order dated 13.11.1997 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur in various cases directing the petitioner department to consider the claim of the respondents herein for regularization, these writ petitions have been filed. Respondents were engaged as Data Entry Operators and while so working they raised the claim for regularization. It was their contention that they are working continuously since 1995 and therefore, they are entitled for regularization. When the matter was being adjudicated before the Central Administrative Tribunal, the department came out with a case that the respondents were engaged as piece rated employees, were paid remuneration in accordance to the work performed by them...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. M. P. Madhyamik Shikshak Sangh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
W.A.No.597/2011 20.8.2013 Shri Samdarshi, learned Govt. Advocate for the appellants. Shri Rajendra Tiwari, learned senior counsel along with Sarva/Shri K.C.Ghildiyal, Shri Vivek Rusia, Shri R.C.Sharma and Ms.Pratiksha Dubey, Advocates for the respondents. I.A.No.11534/2013, for clarification of the order dated 22-6-2011. By the aforesaid order a Division Bench of this Court had directed thus: Taking into account the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the interim order dated 5-11-2009 passed by the Supreme Court in S.L.P.(C) No.19188/2008, we direct the State Government to pay 50% of the benefits of the 5th Pay Commission to the teachers of the private educational institutions which receive grant-in-aid from the State Government from the date of order passed by learned Single Judge i.e., 10-12-2010 within a period of one month from today subject to furnishing an undertaking before the concerned District Education Officer by the teachers that in case i...
Ansaldo Energia, S.P.A. Vs. M.P.State Electricity Board
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
[1]. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR Arbitration Appeal No.3/2008 1. ANSALDO Energia, S.P.A., A Company duly organized and existing under the Laws of Italy with its Principal Office located in via N. Lorenzi, 8, 16152, Geneva, Italy.2. Asia Power Projects Private Limited, (Formerly known as ANSALDO Services Private Limited), having its Registered Office at No.50/1, Residence Road, Third Floor, Gupta Tower, Bangalor025. ..........APPELLANTS Versus 1. Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board, Through its Secretary, Shakti Bhawan, Nayagaon, Jabalpur (M.P.) 2. M.P. Power General Co. Ltd., Through its Managing Director, Shakti Bhawan, Nayagaon, Jabalpur (M.P.) ..........RESPONDENTS Present: Hon. Shri Justice Krishn Kumar Lahoti, Acting C.J.Hon. Smt. Justice Vimla Jain ___________________________________________________________________ Shri S.U. Kamdar, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Nahoush Shah, Shri Manot Sharma and Shri Alok Hoonka, Advocates for the appellants. ...
Javed Anwar and anr. Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-20-2013
1 Writ Petition No.28791 of 2003 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K.Shrivastava Writ Petition No.28791 of 2003 PETITIONER:1. Javed Anwar S/o Anwar Ahmed, aged about 32 yeaRs.R/o Bungalow no.2, Beach Avenue Road, Jabalpur Cantt.2. Smt. Najma Bi W/o Abdul Salam, aged about 30 yeaRs.R/o Part of bungalow no.2, Beach Avenue, Cantt. Jabalpur Versus RESPONDENTS:1. Union of india, Ministry of Defence, Raksha Bhavan, New Delhi 2. Defence Estate Officer, Office of the Estate Defence, Near Kalpana Talkies, Cantt, Jabalpur ______________________________________________________ Shri Girish Shrivastava, for the petitioner. Shri Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and 2. ORDER (20.08.2013) For the reasons stated in the order passed today in W.P.No.2311/2004 (MRS.Brena Fernandez and another vs Union of India 2 Writ Petition No.28791 of 2003 and others).this petition succeeds and is hereby allowed. The impugned order dated 7.10.2002 (Annexure...
- ‹ Prev
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- Next ›
- Last »