Madhya Pradesh Court September 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.
Sandeep Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
Writ Petition No.2998/2013 18.09.2013 Shri Manot Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Amit Sharma, learned PL for respondent Nos.1 and 3. Shri Abhijeet Awasthy, learned counsel for respondent no.2. Presence of respondent No.4 is not required in the matter. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ for the following reliefs:- 1. Summon the entire relevant records from the possession of respondents for its kind perusal.2. Upon holding that the inaction of respondent No.4 is bad in law, command the respondent No.4 to take up and finally decide the Revision No.16/27 of 2011/RC-11 as has been filed on 8.8.2011 at any early date, in the interest of justice.3. Direct the official respondents not to take any action in pursuance to the impugned order, Annexure P-1 to the controveRs.in question for the area in question which is sub judice before the respondent no.4 by way of R...
Smt. Swati Singh Vs. Chandra Bhan Singh Gautam
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
F.A.No.1019/2011 Smt. Swati Singh versus Chandra Bhan Singh Gautam 18/09/2013 Shri Manot Sanghi, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Rajendra Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent. Amendment as prayed for vide I.A.No.8766/2013 to the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is allowed. Necessary correction be made in the said application and the amended copy of the application be filed after serving it to learned counsel for the respondent, who may seek instructions and file reply within two weeks. Copy of the death certificate referred to in the application be also served on learned counsel for the respondent. (Rajendra Menon) (Smt. Vimla Jain) Judge Judge nd...
Smt. Sunita Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
W.P.No.4363/2011 (Smt. Sunita Patel versus State of MP and otheRs.18.09.2013 Heard Shri S.K.Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Akash Choudhary, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. The learned counsel for the petitioner by filing I.A.No.2372/13 for deleting the name of the respondent No.7 has stated that though this petition has been filed challenging the appointment of the respondent No.7 as Aganwadi Worker of village Ramnagar, Gram Panchayat Bhamua District Chhatarpur, however during the pendency of this petition, the respondent No.7 has left the job and gone away and the authority Project Officer on 07.08.12 has informed the petitioner to that effect. It is submitted that as the respondent No.7 has already left the job and the post of Aganwadi Worker has become vacant, the petitioner be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach the authority concerned by filing an application for her appointment as Aganwadi Worker. In view of the aforesaid and the c...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Rajjan @ Balaprasad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.3378/2013 18.9.2013 Shri Vijay Pandey, Deputy Advocate General, for the State/ applicant. Heard on admission. This is an application filed by the State for grant of leave to appeal against the impugned judgment dated 13.2.2013 passed in Special Case No.169/2008 by the Special Judge (Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, Prevention of Atrocities Act).Chhatarpur, whereby he has acquitted respondent nos.1 to 5 of the charges under section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The respondents are brotheRs.The case of prosecution was that on 2.4.2008 at about 8:00 p.m.when the prosecutrix, a member of the Scheduled Caste, had come out of her house to collect firewood, the respondents suddenly appeared and forcibly took her to a nearby field where they committed gang rape on her. On hearing the outcry of prosecutrix, her father-in-law Gilla (P.W.2) and brother...
Rajendra Prasad Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
W.P.No.16037/2013 Rajendra Prasad Mishra vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 18.09.2013 Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Advocate, for the respondent/State, on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 6.9.2013 by which he has been transferred from Janpad Panchayat Raipur Kalchurian, District Rewa to District Sidhi. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been subjected to frequent transfers and that the impugned order results in separation of husband and wife as the petitioner's wife is working as Adhyapika in District Rewa. It is submitted that the impugned order is contrary to the transfer policy. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of R.S.Chaudhary versus State of M.P.and OtheRs.ILR [2007].MP1329has already held that in case transfer is alleged to be contrary to the policy, the appropriate rem...
Miss Kanchan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
W.P.No.15699/2013 18/9/2013: Shri Dharmendra Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Nirmala Nayak, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent No.1 / State. Shri Mahendra Pateria with Shri Brajesh Choubey, learned counsel for respondent No.2. None for respondent No.3. Challenging the action of the respondents in not permitting the petitioner to appear in Diploma in Education, Second Year Main Examination which was conducted for the academic session 2012-13 from 9.7.2013, the writ petition was filed. The case of the petitioner is that she has pursued the couRs.in question from the institute of respondent No.3. As per the requirement prescribed by respondent No.2 for appearing in the aforesaid examination, the examination forms were to be filled online. The procedure was prescribed for filing the examination forms online and the schedule of examination was notified. According to the petitioner, the rules for submission of form contemplated that for submission of the forms online is to be...
SachIn Chouksey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
W.P.No.11141/2013 Sachin Chouksey vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 18.09.2013 Shri Arvind Chouksey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Akash Choudhary, learned Panel Lawyer, for the respondent/State, on advance copy. I.A No.13017/2013, for taking additional documents on record, is rejected as the said documents have no bearing on the said petition. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the fact that the respondent authorities, after counselling, are not passing any final order of appointment and have kept the matter pending. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already filed a representation on 11.6.2013 before the authorities asking them to pass orders pursuant to the counselling conducted but no orders thereon have been passed by the authorities till date nor has the petitioner's representation been considered. Looking to the fact that the petitioner has already app...
Shakti Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
W.P.No.15993/2013 Shakti Singh vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 18.09.2013 Shri Amit Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Advocate, for the respondent/State, on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 24.8.2013 by which he has been transferred from Khandwa to District Rewa. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been subjected to frequent transfers as he has been transferred within a short span of 20 days. It is submitted that the impugned order is contrary to the transfer policy. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of R.S.Chaudhary versus State of M.P.and OtheRs.ILR [2007].MP1329has already held that in case transfer is alleged to be contrary to the policy, the appropriate remedy of the petitioner is to approach the authority themselves by filing a representation. In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed b...
South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Vs. Amardas Raidas
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
South Eastern Coalfields LTD.versus Amardas Raidas and others.M.C.C.No.1103/13 18/09/13 Shri Greeshm Jain, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Brijesh Mishra, learned counsel for respondent No.1. Seeking extension of the stay granted by this Court on 6/05/13 till decision on the application which is pending before the appellate Court in a proceeding under Order 41 Rule 5 C.P.C. , this application has been filed. When W.P.No.468/13 was disposed of by this Court on 6/05/13, an interim protection was granted by this Court upto 18/05/13, because an application for stay and the application for condonation of delay was to be considered and decided on 18/05/13 by the trial Court. From the order sheets filed by the petitioneRs.it is seen that the matter is being adjourned for one reason or the other and finally, it is reported that the case is now fixed before the appellate Court on 4/08/13 for considering the application for condonation of delay and the stay application. Order sheets do ...
Shashi Sahu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
W.P.No.15762/2013 Shashi Sahu vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 18.09.2013 Shri Surendra Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.M.Lal, learned Govt. Advocate, for the respondent/State, on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 1.8.2013 passed in Appeal Case No.123/A-89/2009-10 by the respondent no.2 Additional Commissioner, Jabalpur Division in the appeal filed by respondent no.6 against her termination. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that the respondent no.6 was appointed as Anganwadi Worker in village Mahuljhir, Janpad Panchayat Tamiya, District Chhindwara. However, for certain reasons her services were terminated and thereafter the respondent authorities, during the pendency of her appeal, took up proceedings for filling up the post of Anganwadi Worker in village Mahuljhir pursuant to which the petitioner was appointed as Anganwadi Worker on 24....
- ‹ Prev
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- Next ›
- Last »