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.
Sanjeev Kumar Sharma Vs. Union of India Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Sh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
W.P.NO.3463/2012 08/01//2014 None appears for the petitioner. Smt.Amrit Ruprah, learned counsel for the respondents. Challenge in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is made to an order dated 06-02-2012(Annexure P-22) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal,Bench Jabalpur in O.A.No.96/2010. By the said order the original application filed by the petitioner under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, has been rejected on the ground that earlier also similar prayer made has been rejected. It is seen from the record that the petitioner sought appointment on Group-D/Class-IV post in the Railway department and claimed parity with one Anil Kumar Dubey and Nandkishore Birha, who were arrayed as respondent Nos.5 and 6. Initially he approached the High Court by filing W.P.No.3265/2001. The said writ petition was disposed of and the petitioner was granted liberty to represent to the General Manager of the Railway and the General Manager was directed to con...
Rakesh Tiwari Vs. Union of India Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Just ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
W.P.No.507/2013 8/1/2014 Shri S.K.Dubey,learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri O.P.Namdeo, learned counsel for respondent no.1. With consent of learned counsel for the parties the matter is heard finally. Grievance raised by the petitioner is against nonreference of the dispute pertaining to the salary for the period from 1.8.2011 to 26.8.2011 by the Central Government for adjudication to the Labour Court. Employed as electrical helper in South Eastern Coalfields Ltd., petitioner raised the dispute before the Additional Labour Commissioner, (Central Government) Shahdol against his non-promotion for electrician category and for non-grant of wages from the period 1.8.2011 to 26.8.2011. Respondent no.2 on being noticed denied the claim of the petitioner which resulted in failure of conciliation.The report whereof, was forwarded to the Central Government by Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central Government ) Shahdol vide his communication dated 4.5.2011.The Central Government in pursuanc...
Ntpc Ltd (Formerly National thermal Powe Vs. the State of Madhya Prade ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
NTPC Ltd & Another versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.2024 / 2008 8.1.2014: Shri H.S.Shrivastava, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Sandesh Jain, counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Devashish Sakalkar, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Challenging the order Annexure P-8 dated 28.11.2007 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Satna imposing liability of `4,67,03,347/- by way entry tax, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner. Petitioner company has established a Thermal Power Project at Vindhya Nagar, Sidhi. The project has been established after due approval from the Government of India for the assessment year 01.04.1997 to 31.03.1998 and the entry tax in question has been imposed. It is the case of petitioner that during this period for the purpose of establishment of their second phase certain construction activities were going on and for the purpose of this construction plant and machineries for setting up of the power house were purchased and were ...
Madhya Pradesh Fencing Association Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Jud ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
1 W.P.No.395/2014 8/1/2014. Shri Akash Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner. Issue notice to the respondents on payment of P.F.within one week returnable in four weeks. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of interim relief. The question is as to which team should be permitted to participate in the ongoing 15 th Sub Junior National Fencing Championship 2013-14 to be held in Cuttack. It seems that there is certain dispute with regard to the representation of the association and certain association said to have been formulated and represented by respondent No.4 is also claiming to be the authorized body. According to the petitioner, the election and formation of association of respondent No.4 is illegal and they are a unauthorized body. In support thereof, various documents have been filed including a communication from the competent authority of the State Government dated 6.1.2014 Annexure P/8 to say that the election in which the body respondent No.4 was el...
Dashrath Prasad Yadav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
1 W.P.No.22275/2013 8/1/2014. Shri R. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Joglekar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents. Petitioners were candidates who were debarred from participating in the third round of counselling for appointment to the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade I, II and III mainly on the ground that they do not fulfill the requisite qualification. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have five years of experience in teaching and therefore, their claim should be considered for appointment. Bringing to the notice of this Court an order passed by the Gwalior Bench of this Court directing for considering the representation of certain similarly placed employees, petitioners seeks interference into the matter. Shri Joglekar points out that when a minimum qualification is prescribed by the State Government in the statutory rules then dehORS.the statutory rules merely on the basis of experience gained by the petitioneR...
Omprakash Gupta Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Ho ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
Writ Petition No.1351/2013 08/01/2014 Shri Sushil Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Puneet Shroti, learned Panel Lawyer, for the respondents. Though this petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but the order passed by the Collector in exercise of his quasi judicial powers in an appeal filed by the petitioners is called in question. The only submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the order dated 1.1.2013 was passed in an appeal filed by the petitioners holding that the petitioners were not competent to file the appeal in terms of the provisions of M.P.Public Distribution System (Control) OrdeRs.2009. It is contended that in terms of the provisions of Rule 12 of the aforesaid Order the petitioners were competent to file the appeal against the order of Sub Divisional Officer and at least the appeal filed by the petitioner No.1 should have been considered, as he was a seller appointed in the said fair price shop. Though a retur...
Karan Singh Lodha Vs. Shri Ajatshatru Shrivastava Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
Contempt Petition No.693/2012 (K.S.Lodha versus Shri Ajatshatru Shrivastava) 08.01.2014 Shri A.K.Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Pranay Choubey, learned counsel for the respondent. The petitioner has filed this contempt petition alleging non compliance and disobedience of the order passed by this court on 18.02.2011 in W.P.No.2892/2011(S).The respondent has pointed out that they had filed a review application before the same bench seeking review of the order dated 18.02.2011 passed in W.P.No.2892/2011(S) which has been allowed by order dated 10.12.2012 in Review Petition No.872/2012 and the order has been modified. In the circumstances, it is stated that the proceedings do not survive as the order dated 18.02.2011, against which this contempt petition has been filed, stands modified. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the order dated 10.12.2012 passed in Review Petition No.872/2012 the petitioner has filed a writ appeal before the Division Be...
Ajay Goswami Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'b ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
M.Cr.C.No.2280/2013 M.Cr.C.No.2280/2013 8.1.2014 Shri Dinesh Upadhyay, counsel for the applicant. Shri Akshay Namdeo, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.1. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, counsel for the respondent No.2. As prayed by the learned counsel for the parties, heard them finally. The applicant has challenged the registration of crime No.140/2012 registered at Police station Kotwali, District Damoh for offence punishable under sections 353, 294, 506 of IPC. The facts of the case, in short, are that, the respondent No.2 had lodged an FIR against the applicant about the incident, which took place on 5.3.2012 at about 8.45 p.m.in the night that the applicant entered in his office and held his collar and tried to assault him. The other persons participated to save him. The applicant abused him with obscene words and threatened him. After due investigation, SHO Police station Kotwali, District Damoh had submitted a final closure report before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Damoh. The le...
Jugal Kishor Vs. Dwarka Prasad Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justic ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
1 S.A.No.1014/2013 S.A.No.1014/2013 08.01.2014 Shri V.S.Trivedi, learned counsel for appellants. Heard on admission. This is plaintiffs' second appeal directed against judgment and decree dated 07.08.2013 passed in civil appeal No.1-A/2013 by second Additional District Judge, Narsinghpur affirming the judgment and decree dated 22.02.2013 passed in civil suit No.44-A/2008 by fiRs.civil Judge Class-II dismissing the suit by the plaintiffs. Suit by the plaintiffs was for declaration and for permanent injunction in respect of Well admeasuring 40x45 square feet situated at Mouja Kandeli, Bajrang ward, Municipal Council, Narsinghpur that it be declared to be the property of Municipal Council, Narsinghpur and the respondent/defendant No.1 be perpetually prohibited from using the same. The suit was on the ground that the suit property being a Nistari Well was being maintained by the Municipal Council, however, subsequently with the water supply though pipeline, the maintenance of suit Well was...
Sharda Prabandhak Samiti Karmchari Sangh Vs. the State of Madhya Prade ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-08-2014
1 Writ Petition No.18552/2013 8.1.2014 Shri Sanjay Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Government Advocate for State of M.P.on advance notice. Heard on admission. There exists a deity at Maihar: "Maa Sharda Devi". That an Act has been enacted by the Madhya Pradesh Legislature to provide for the better maintenance, preservation, administration and governance of Maa Sharda Devi Mandir and its endowment and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Act is called the Madhya Pradesh Maa Sharda Devi Mandir Adhiniyam, 2002. Section 3(e) defines "Committee" to mean the Maa Sharda Devi Mandir Managing Committee constituted under the statute. Chapter II lays down the provisions as to vesting of property and constitution of committee. As per Section 5, the possession, administration, control and management of the Mandir and its endowments vests in "Committee". The "Committee" is constituted under Section 6. Section 11 lays down the duties of the Com...
- ‹ Prev
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- Next ›
- Last »