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.
Kamlesh Yadav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon' ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
1 W.P.No.21970/2013 2/1/2014. Shri Anirudh Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Rahul Jain, learned Dy. Advocate General for the respondents. Petitioners were appointed as Rasoiya in a Girls Hostel, Shahpura, District Dindori in accordance to a scheme formulated by the State Government as is contained in Annexure P/6. Services of the petitioners are dispensed with mainly on the ground that as per the scheme in a Girls Hostel the person to be appointed as Rasoiya has to be female person and as petitioners ( male persons) have been appointed, contrary to the policy their appointment is terminated. As far as petitioner No.1 is concerned, petitioner No.1 has been appointed as Rasoiya and according to Shri Rahul Jain on the post of Rasoiya only a female candidate can be appointed and therefore, appointment of petitioner No.1 is illegal. As far as petitioner No.2 is concerned, even though he was appointed as Assistant Rasoiya and it is the case of petitioner No.2 that one post of...
Smt. Saroj Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
W.P.No.17763/2013 02.01.2014 Shri Hemant Namdeo, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Heard on the question of admission. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is with respect to non-empanelment of the petitioners as a Guest Teacher. It is contended that looking to the merits of the petitioneRs.they were empanelled as Guest Teacher. Subsequently, the respondent No.5 has been empanelled without considering the seniority of the petitioneRs.therefore, this writ petition is required to be filed, claiming following reliefs :- (7.1) That, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/ direction to direct the respondent No.4 to appoint petitioner as a Guest Teacher on the basis of seniority in the light of directions (Annexure P-2) issued by respondent No.2 and pay salary accordingly, in the interest of justice. (7.2) It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased...
Usha Chhapriya Vs. Mahesh Prasad @ Mahesh Kumar Judgement Given By: Ho ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
W.P.No.19412/2013 02.01.2014 Shri Neelesh Kotecha, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Heard on the question of admission. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have called in question the order dated 1.8.2013, passed in Civil Suit No.127-A/2010, by I Civil Judge Class-II, Khurai. The petitioneRs.the defendants in the suit filed an application under Order 14 Rule 5 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the CPC for brevity) for framing of certain additional issues and trying the same as preliminary issues. Such an application was opposed by the respondent/plaintiff and by the impugned order, the trial Court has rejected the application of petitioneRs.therefore, this writ petition is filed. The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction claiming that the respondent/plaintiff is the owner in possession of land bearing Survey No.609/1, Area 1.802 hectare. A sale deed was executed by the re...
Kavindra Patel Vs. Rani Durgawati Vishwavidyalaya Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
Writ Petition No :: 15119 / 2013 Kavindra Patel and another versus State of MP and others 02.01.2014. Shri Narendra Sharma for the petitioneRs.Shri Kamlesh Dwivedi for respondent No.1. None for respondent No.2. Petitioners were students, who was granted admission to the B.Ed CouRs.in the Academic Session 2007-08, and contending that the result of the petitioners is not being declared by the University, this writ petition is filed. Learned counsel for the respondents point out that this is one of the case where the recognition and affiliation granted to the Institute in question i.e Krishna Rao Khot B.Ed College, Mandla, was cancelled; recognition was never granted to the Institute in question; and, the Institute without even grant of recognition admitted the students. The matter came to this Court and thereafter travelled to the Supreme Court in a SLP filed. The Supreme Court, in the SLP filed by most of the colleges, passed an interim order directing for grant of admission provisional...
Anik Industries Ltd. Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given B ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
1 W. P. No.11814/2013. 2.1.2014. Shri Shreyash Dharmadhikari, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned G. A. for the respondents. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuing appropriate writ against the respondents for following reliefs.1. Call for the entire records of the case for its kind perusal.2. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents No.1 to furnish the information asked for by the Central Government vide letter dated 20/02/2009 (Ann.P.3) 3. In the alternative issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus to respondent No.1 to decide the applications filed by the petitioner as early as possible within a period of thirty days.4. Any other writ/ writs, order/ orders, relief/ reliefs, deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case may also kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice.5. Saddle ...
Girdhar Patel Vs. Election Commissioners Government Judgement Given By ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
W.P.No.22267/2013 W.P.No.22307/2013 02.01.2014 Shri T.S.Ruprah, learned senior counsel assisted by Shri U.S.Tiwari, counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.22267/2013. Shri Rajendra Mishra, Advocate for the petitioner in W.P.No.22307/2013. Shri P.K.Kaurav, Additional Advocate General for the respondents/State. Shri Siddhartha Seth, Advocate for the M.P.State Election Commission. Both these petitions take exception to the Notification dated 11th December, 2013 issued by the State Election Commission for conducting election to the office of Mayor of Municipal Corporation, Sagar. As per the said Notification, the date of polling is scheduled on 6th January, 2014. The principal grievance of the petitioner in the respective petitions, is that, deserving and eligible persons are being left out from the voters lists finalized in January, 2013. According to the petitioneRs.if the elections are to be held in January, 2014, in view of the provisions contained in the Act of 1956 read with the Rules ...
Shankhdhar Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: H ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
1 W.P.No.18570/2013 2/1/2014. Shri K.C.Ghildyal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt.D.K. Bohrey, learned Govt. Advocate, for the respondents. Petitioner is working as Incharge District Organizer Tribal Welfare Department, Rewa and by the impugned order dated 26.9.2013 and 4.10.2013 petitioner has been transferred from Rewa to Satna and therefore, challenge is made to the said transfer order mainly on two counts. The fiRs.ground is that in Satna no post of District Organizer is available and therefore, petitioner cannot be posted in Satna. The second ground is that petitioner is being transferred only to grant adjustment to respondent No.5. Record indicates that earlier also challenging his transfer and posting of respondent No.5 petitioner had approached this Court in W.P.No.10035/2011 and vide order dated 13.12.2011, Annexure P/2, the petition was disposed of granting liberty to the respondents to pass an order afresh in the matter of posting of the petitioner. Now when the petit...
Jairam Das Wadhwani Vs. Anil Shrivastava Judgement Given By: Hon'ble S ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
C.P.No.2533/2013 (J.D.Wadhwani versus Anil Shrivastava and another) 02.01.2014 Heard Shri Rajesh Panjwani, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this application alleging non- compliance and disobedience of the order passed by this court in W.P.No.15791/12 on 25.09.2012 wherein the respondents/authorities have been directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner within 60 days from the date of submitting certified copy of the order passed in the writ petition with a further stipulation for maintaining the status quo as it existed on that day. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order passed by this court in the aforesaid writ petition has not been complied with by the respondents/authorities. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is however observed that there is nothing on record to indicate that the petitioner ever submitted the certified copy of the order passed ...
A.K. Shrivastava Vs. Union of India Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri J ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
1 W. P. No. 22427/2013 2.1.2014 Shri Anoop Nair, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Praveen Namdeo, learned counsel for respondents. Heard. It is submitted by learned counsel for the parties that the issue raised in this petition is squarely covered by the decision rendered in South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. through its General Manager, Jamuna & Kotma Area v. Union of India W.P. No. 8368/2013 and batch of other petitions decided on 20.9.2013 whereby, challenge as to legality, validity and correctness of order by Union of India of rejecting the request of Coal India Limited for exemption from requirement of formation of works committee under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has been upheld in the following terMs.12. In the considered opinion of this Court, the respondent was required to examine the application of the petitioner on the anvil of aforesaid test. If impugned order is minutely ...
Suman Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'b ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
1 Writ Petition No.10564/2009 02/01/2014 Shri V.K.Shukla,learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. D.K.Bohre, learned Govt. Advocate for the State. Shri V.P.Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.5. Even though the case is listed today for orders on I.A.No.16639/13 but considering the short controveRs.involved in the matter and with the consent of the parties, this petition is being heard and disposed of by this court. Process was initiated in the year 2007 for appointment to the post of Anganwari worker in Bhagat Singh Colony, Ward No.9 Medholi,Tehsil and district Singrauli. The petitioner and respondent no.5 submitted their candidatures for appointment to the post in question. Even though the petitioner and her husband are permanent resident of Gorakhpur District in U.P.but as husband of the petitioner was working in a establishment situated in district Singrauli and after her marriage, the petitioner was staying with her husband, she submitted her candidature supported by certain c...
- ‹ Prev
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 60
- Next ›
- Last »