Madhya Pradesh Court January 2014 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.
Hukumchand Tantuvay Kori Vs. Secretary School Education the State of M ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
Writ Petition No :: 575 / 2014 Hukumchand Tantuvay (Kori) versus State of MP and others 16.01.2014. None for the petitioner. Shri Amit Pandey, Panel Lawyer, for State. Petitioner is challenging the action of the respondents in denying the benefit of second Kramonnati and proposing to make recovery of benefit already granted. The question involved in this petition stands already decided by a Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Prerna W/o. Shri Promod Koranne versus State of M.P.and OtheRs.in W.P.No.6773/06, decided on 26/04/2007, and subsequently followed by this Court in series of cases, one such order being passed in W.P.No.5756/08(s).Shri R.C.Chaurasiya & Others versus State of M.P.& OtheRs.decided on 26/05/2008. In the case of Smt. Prerna (Supra) the directions given is as under : 17. Consequently these petitions are allowed. The petitioners are entitled to derive the benefit of second Krammonati according to the terms and conditions mentioned in the circular dated 21.3.83, 19.4...
Jagdish Prasad Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
W.P.No.280/2014 (J.P.Tiwari versus State of MP and otheRs.16.01 .2014 Shri S.K.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri SM Lal, learned G.A.for the State on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 28.12.2013 by which excess suspension allowance paid to him, is sought to be recovered. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has already filed a representation before the Principal, Govt. Higher Secondary School Tikhwa District Shahdol against the proposed recovery but no decision thereon has been taken till date and in such circumstances, the respondents/authorities be directed to decide the same and properly compute the suspension allowance of the petitioner and withdraw the impugned order. Shri S.M.Lal, learned Government Advocate appearing in advance copy submits that the representation of the petitioner shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. In v...
Smt. Snehlata Rai Vs. Secretary School Education the State of Madhya P ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
1 W.P.No.652/2014 W.P.No.652/2014 16.01.2014 Shri Nitin Shukla, learned counsel for petitioneRs.Ms.V.Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for respondent/State. Petitioners initially appointed as Shiksha Karmis under the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Janpad Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1998. Subsequently, being absorbed as Sahayak Adhyapaks in pursuance to the Madhya Pradesh Adhyapak Samvarg (Employment and Conditions of service) Rules 2008 and granted regular pay-scale with effect from 01.04.2007 seeks direction to the respondents to grant regular pay-scale from the date of their initial appointment as Shiksha Karmi. During the couRs.of submission, it is being stated by learned counsel for petitioners that similarly situated persons have approached this Court vide writ petition No.602/2010(s) : Mohanlal and ors.v.State of Madhya Pradesh decided on 22.01.2010 & writ petition No.4720/2013 : Jitendra Yadav v. State of Madhya Pradesh and these petitions we...
Sonu Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
M.Cr.C No.13182/2013 16.01.2014 Shri Ashish Kurmi, Advocate with Shri Priyank Choubey, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Yogendra Das Yadav, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. This is repeat application preferred after 02/09/2013, when similar prayer was dismissed as withdrawn. This is repeat application for bail under section 439 of Cr.P.C.for offence under Section 376, 363, 366, 341, 294, 368, 506 and 148 of IPC and under section 25/27 of Arms Act in connection with Crime No.30/2013 registered at Police Station Maharajpur, District Sagar. Learned counsel for applicant submits that new circumstance is that all nine other accused persons have been released on bail, some of them from the High Court and rest of accused from the trial court. According to prosecution on 17/03/2013 petitioner and 9 other accused persons forcibily kidnapped the prosecutrix aged 17 years on which co-accused committed rape also. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that no overt act of intercouRs.attribut...
Sunil Bidua Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'bl ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
1 Cr.R.No.1352/12. 16.1.2014. Shri Sumit Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the applicants. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned G.A.for the respondents. Heard on the question of admission. Applicants/ accused have filed this revision under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the order dated 9.11.2009 passed by the JMFC Bhopal in Criminal Case 13081/09, framing the charges against each of the applicants for the offence under Section 498-A and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC. The applicants' counsel after taking me through the papers of the charge sheet including the FIR and interrogatory statement of complainant/ respondent No.2 as well as of other witnesses, so also the other papeRs.which are not the part of the charge sheet, placed on record, argued that after lodging the FIR some mutual settlement has taken place between the applicant No.1 and respondent No.2. According to such settlement they decided to reside together under the same roof, it was also settled that respondent No.2 shall w...
Sheikh Samad Mansoori Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
Sheikh Samad Mansoori versus State of M.P.& ORS.1 Writ Petition No.529 / 2014 16.1.2014 Shri R.K.Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Amit Pandey, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. The petitioner claims grant of regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment. The benefit is claimed by the petitioner in the light of the order passed by the Division Bench at Indore Bench of this Court, in W.A.No.346/2008 (Smt. Usha Ranawat versus State of M.P.and others).dated 18-12-2008. By the aforesaid order passed, more than 25 writ appeals claiming similar benefits were decided and it was directed that the benefit of pay fixation in the regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment shall be made to the petitioner therein. In fact the Division Bench has upheld the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in various cases and while deciding the writ appeals in para-19 the following directions were issued by the Division Bench: 19. In view of the foregoing discussion, th...
Arun Pal Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
W.P.No.21486/2013 16/01/2014 Shri V.D.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner was serving as Assistant Grade II in Govt. Excellency Higher Secondary School, Shahnagar, Distt. Panna. He was transferred to Govt. High School, Banauli vide order dated 12/7/2012. Writ Petition No.1346/20013 was filed challenging the order of transfer before this Court. This Court while disposing of the aforesaid writ petition on 1/2/2013 directed the Collector to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the said representation. This Court further directed that while deciding the representation, Collector shall bear in mind the order passed by the District Education Officer dated 18/7/2012. The petitioner was allowed to continue in the Govt. Higher Secondary School, Shahnagar, Distt. Panna till the decision upon his representation. By the impugned order dated 25/9/2013, the representation of the petitioner has been decided.2....
Gajadhar Prasad Vs. Phoolmani Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
1 S.A.No.81/2011 S.A.No.81/2011 16.01.2014 Shri O.M.Mishra, learned counsel for appellants. Heard on admission. This is defendant's second appeal directed against the judgment and decree dated 13.10.2010 passed by VIth Additional District Judge, Rewa in Civil Appeal No.106-A/2010 upholding the judgment and decree dated 11.01.2008 passed in Civil Suit No.168-A/2006 by Civil Judge Class-II, Rewa to the extent that the defendant may remove the wall and house constructed over the suit property and reveRs.the finding that the plaintiff's are the exclusive owner of the suit property. There exist houses constructed over KhaSr.No.2336 2337 and 2338 at village Badwar. Whereas, the house constructed over KhaSr.No.2338 belongs to the plaintiff/respondents (the original plaintiff Budhsen since expired is being represented through his legal heiRs.whereas the house(s) constructed over KhaSr.No.2336 and 2337 belongs to the appellant/Defendants who are real brothers and in possession of their respecti...
Puneet Marwah Vs. Kripal Singh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justic ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
Review Petition No :: 14 / 2014 Puneet Marwah and another versus Kripal Singh and others 16.01.2014. None for the petitioneRs.None for respondents 1 to 3. Shri Rahul Jain, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent Nos.4 and 5. This application has been filed for review/recall of an order-dated 3.12.2013, passed in Writ Petition No.6620/2010. The said writ petition was disposed of in the light of a specific application I.A.No.9022/2011 filed by the State Government and the averments made therein alongwith copy of certain ordeRs.Case of the petitioners in this review application seems to be that if the orders passed by the State Government are implemented certain rights available to them would be adversely affected. If that be so, petitioners herein are required to challenge the order passed by the State Government based on which W.P.No.6620/2010 was disposed of by this Court. Once the State Government has come out with a specific case in the matter of granting relief to the petitioners in...
Sanjay Kumar Shrivastava Vs. Smt.Pratibha Shrivastava Judgement Given ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-16-2014
Cr.R.No.1584 of 2012 16.01.2014 Shri Amrit Ruprah, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Vinay Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent. The applicant's counsel is heard on the question of admission. The applicant - husband has filed this petition under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of Cr.P.C being aggrieved by the order dated 25.7.2012 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Rehli, District Sagar in Criminal Revision No.137/2012 setting aside the order dated 12.4.2012 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Rehali, District Sagar in MJ.No.60/2005, dismissing the application of respondent filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.and by allowing the revision of respondent in part after setting aside such order of JMFC has remitted the matter to such court again with some directions to decide afresh. The facts giving rise to this revision in short are that the respondent herein filed the impugned application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.in the aforesaid court of JMFC and aforesaid order dat...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »