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.
Mohanlal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
Writ Petition No.15806/2013 (O) 17.09.2013 Shri S. Kanojiya, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Ashok Chourasiya, learned Govt. Adv for respondent-State. Heard. The petitioners working as Watchmen (ChoukidaRs.under the provision of M.P.Land Revenue Code 1959 have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ for the following reliefs:- 1. To command the respondents to decide the petitioners claims/representations in the light of notification dated 3.3.2010, (Ann. P-3) as has been directed in order Annexure P-4 passed in W.P.No.939/2009, 2. Any other relief which deemed fit and proper may also be given to the petitioners in the interest of justice. PetitioneRs.counsel after taking me through the averments of the petition, papers placed on record argued that since long, the petitioners are coming in possession of the land described in the petition as Watchmen of the village because the same has been given to them as Service Land. In...
Punjaram Godbole Vs. Rahul Jaiswal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
M.Cr.C.No.4252/2013 17.09.2013 Shri Rahul Rawat, counsel for the applicants. Shri Mrigendra Singh, counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3. Shri Akshay Namdeo, Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.4/State. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The applicants have challenged the order dated 16.1.2013 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara in Criminal Revision No.179/2012, whereby the order dated 17.9.2012 passed by the learned S.D.M., Sausar District Chhindwara was set aside and directed that the proceedings may be initiated in following to the order dated 10.9.2012. Facts of the case, in short are that, initially a civil suit was filed by one Rupesh and others against Kunjram and others for partition and possession, and the suit was decreed on 15.12.2007. An appeal was preferred before the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara and vide judgment dated 30.10.2009, the appeal was dismissed. Thereafter, the respondent Nos.1 & 2 sold the property by registered ...
Maya Bai Gound (Smt.) Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
1 W.P No.15398 o17. 9.2013 Shri Sourabh Sharma, counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India (appears to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) for the following reliefs :- (a) To call for the record pursuant to the instant controveRs.for its kind perusal. (b) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct to respondent No.1 to 4 to consider and decide the application dated 27.4.13 and 29.8.13 in accordance to law and also may kindly be directed to respondent No.2 to 3 to remove the encroachment as earlier as possible. (c ) Cost of the petition. Having heard the counsel on the question of admission, keeping in view the arguments advanced, I have carefully gone through the papers placed on the record. It appears from the averments of the petition and the complaint/application Annex.P/2 and P/3 submitted before the Collector and Commissioner of the concerning area that the land described in the p...
Manzoor Ahmad Mansoori Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
W.P.No.14831 / 2013 (Manzoor Ahmad Mansoori..versus State of MP & others].17-09-2013 Shri L.S.Singh, learned senior counsel with Shri J.L.Soni, for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the order dated 12-8-2013 by which the petitioner's application dated 30-7-2013 has not been accepted by the Principal, Government Law College, Rewa. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner is a guest lecturer in the Law College, Rewa and has been working as such since the last nine years and was also engaged as a guest lecturer for the session 2012-13. It is stated that the Principal of the law college thereafter at the end of the session 2013 did not permit the petitioner to take lectures against which the petitioner had filed a W.P.No.11841/2013 praying for a direction to the Principal of the college not to act upon the fresh advertisement issued by him and...
Anand Kumar Pareta Vs. Senior Divisional Manager Lic and anr
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
1 W.P No.1538/1999 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR WRIT PETITION NO.1538/1999 PETITIONER : ANAND KUMAR PARETA Vs. RESPONDENTS : LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND OTHERS. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the petitioner : Shri Anil Khare and Shri Yash Soni, Advocate. For the respondents : Shri R. P. Agrawal, Senior Counsel with Shri Santosh Yadav,Advocate. Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice R.S. Jha. ORDER (17/09/2013) The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 7.4.1998, Annexure P-1, by which his services as a Probationary Development Officer has been dispensed with by a simple innocuous order.2. The brief facts, leading to the filing of the present petition, are that the petitioner was initially appointed for a period of 9 months as an Apprentice Probationary Development Officer in the establishment of the respondents on 9.10.1995. Subsequently on 6.7.1996 he was appointed as a Probationary Developme...
Gyani Prasad Prajapati Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
W.P.No.14898/2013 Gyani Prasad Prajapati vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 17.09.2013 Shri Surya Kumar Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Akash Choudhary, learned Panel Lawyer, for the respondent/State, on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition claiming appointment on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III on the strength of the order passed by this Court in LPA No.48/2002 decided on 23.10.2003. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as some persons had been granted appointment as Shiksha Karmi Grade-III by the Division Bench of this Court in the aforesaid case, similar benefits be extended to the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has filed a representation before the authorities claiming the said similar relief on 15.5.2013, Annexure P-5, but no decision thereon has been taken till date and, therefore, the authorities be directed to do so. The petitioner has prayed that this C...
Chamra Lal Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
[1]. Criminal Appeal No.1635/2002 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR DB : Hon'ble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava & Hon'ble Shri Justice G.S. Solanki Criminal Appeal No.1635/2002 Appellant: Chamra Lal S/o Sonu Lal Gond R/o Village Kohka, Police Station Bamhni District Mandla, M.P. Versus Respondent: State of Madhya Pradesh _________________________________________________________________________ Shri Umesh Trivedi with Shri S. Trivedi, Advocates for the appellants. Shri Chandrakant Mishra, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State. ___________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT [17.9.2013]. Per : A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. The judgment passed in this appeal shall also govern the disposal of connected Criminal Appeal No.924/95 (Mangrulal and two others Vs. State of M.P.) since both the appeals have arisen from common judgment passed by the trial Court convicting the appellants under different offences.2. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and o...
Vinay Kumar Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
W.P.No.14864/2013 [Vinay Kumar Pandey.Vs..State of M.P.& others].17-09-2013 Shri Iqbal Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.M.Lal, learned G.A.for the State/respondents. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner, who has been working since long as Block Programme Manager and other posts in the Scheme under the National Rural Health Mission in Narsinghpur, has filed this petition being aggrieved by the decision of the respondents dated 31.7.2013 by which the respondents have taken a decision not to continue with the services of the petitioner and other similarly situated persons and to bring their services to an end by issuing one month's notice. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been working under the Scheme and Programme of National Rural Health Mission as Block Child Health Manager in Narsinghpur and has acquired knowledge and experience in the said field. It is submitted that the Schemes being i...
Prahlad Bhai Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
W.P.No.6483/2013 Prahlad Bhai Patel & Ors. vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 17.09.2013 Heard Shri Shyam Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.on the question of admission. The petitioners have filed this petition claiming appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-II. The petitioners submit that though they are qualified, they have not been permitted to participate in the selection process. By an interim order this Court had permitted the petitioners to appear in the counselling with a clear stipulation that on the basis of their inclusion the petitioners shall not claim any equity and that the result of the petitioners shall not be declared. The petitioneRs.now, pray that the authorities be directed to issue orders in their favour. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioneRs.it is observed that the question as to whether the petitioners are eligible in accordance with the Rules or not or whether the petitioneRs.claim for appointment deserves to be rejected, are a...
The Secr.Finance Deptt.Bhopal and ors. Vs. Smt.Shanti Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2013
1 F.A.No.230 of 1996 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBHASH KAKADE FIRST APPEAL No.230 of 1996 APPLICANTS:1. The Secretary, Finance Deptt. Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal.2. The Sales Tax Officer/Tahsildar Recovery, Circule -2, Sagar (M.P.) 3. The State of M.P. Through Collector, District Sagar (M.P.), Versus RESPONDENT: Smt. Shanti Bai aged 47 years W/o Vimalchand Jain, R/o Gadakota, Tahsil Gadakota, District Sagar (M.P.). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Piyush Jain, Counsel for the appellants. Shri T.S. Ruprah, Senior Advocate with Shri Harpreet Ruprah, Advocate for the respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judgment reserved on :12. 09.2013 Judgment delivered on :17. 09.2013 (JUDGMENT) This appeal is directed by the appellants/defendants being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 23.12.1995 passed in Civil Suit...
- ‹ Prev
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- Next ›
- Last »