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.
Rajesh Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon' ...
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 ...
Brijmohan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
Writ Petition No.22119/2013. 2.1.2014. Shri Narendra Sharma, learned counsel for petitioneRs.Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Government Advocate for the State of M.P.on advance notice. Heard. PetitioneRs.engaged as peon in Higher Secondary School, have filed this petition seeking direction to the respondents to grant backwages for the period from 1.5.2000 to 29.2.2004 with all consequential benefits. Facts giving rise to the claim of the petitioners briefly are that they were initially appointed in the year 1990 on daily wages. Services of the petitioners were dispensed with w.e.f.1.5.2000. That, in pursuance to the policy decision taken by the State Government vide Memo No.F-5-4/2003-1/3 Bhopal, dated 21.1.2004, the petitioners were reinstated vide order-dated 28.2.2004 on work-charged establishment with a specific condition that they will not be entitled for wages from 2000-2004, neither they will be entitled for seniority for the said period. Admittedly, the petitioners did not question the...
Pyarelal Vs. Abdul Rauf (Dead) Th: Lrs. Moh. Rafiq Ansari Judgement Gi ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
1 Writ Petition No.13735/2013 2.1.2014 Shri R.K.Kesharwani, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on admission. Order dated 3.6.2013 passed by the Board of Revenue is being questioned vide this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, whereby, while setting aside the remand order dated 15.9.2011 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Rewa Division, Rewa, the order of Sub-Divisional Officer (dated 12.12.2008) and of Tehsildar, Hajoor (30.11.2007) have been restored. Application under Section 107 of 1959 code was filed by the respondents for correction of KhaSr.entries in respect of the property bearing KhaSr.No.393/3 (old) area 0.93 acres (New No.678/3).Tehsildar by order dated 30.11.2007 directed for correction of record by replacing with KhaSr.No.663 area 0.13 acre. The order was uphold in Appeal by Sub-Divisional Officer by order dated 2.12.2008. However, these orders were reversed in Second Appeal by the Additional Commissioner who remitted the matter to Tehsilda...
Chandrama Prasad Tiwari Vs. Smt. Jyotsna Mishra Judgement Given By: Ho ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
W.P.No.14778/2013 02.01.2014 None for the petitioneRs.Shri D.N.Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent No.1. With the assistance of learned counsel for the respondent No.1, the matter is heard. The grievance of the petitioner in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is against the order dated 29.7.2013, passed in Civil Suit No.102-A/2012 by the V Civil Judge, Class-II, Shahdol, closing the defence of the petitioneRs.A suit was filed by the respondent No.1/ plaintiff against the present petitioners and respondent No.2 for declaration and permanent injunction. The summons of the suit were issued to the petitioners who were served. Despite the opportunities granted, no written statement was filed by them. On 29.7.2013, an application was filed by the respondent No.1/plaintiff under Order 8 Rule 1 and 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the CPC for brevity).A reply to the said application was filed by the petitioneRs.the application was h...
Smt. Sangita Dahikar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given B ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
Writ Petition No :: 4973 / 2013 Smt. Sangita Dahikar versus State of MP and others 02.01.2014. Shri S.K.Soni for the petitioner. Smt. D.K.Bohrey, Panel Lawyer, for State. Shri K.K.Singh for respondent No.2. Shri Kamlesh Dwivedi for respondent No.3. None for respondent No.4. Petitioner was a student who was granted admission to the B.Ed CouRs.in the Academic Session 2007-08, and contending that the result of the petitioner 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 Dr. Radha Krisnan College of Education, Jabalpur, 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 colleg...
Nawab Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'bl ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
1 Writ Petition No.17998/2013 Writ Petition No.17998/2013 02.01.2014 Shri Ranjeet Singh, learned counsel for petitioner. Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Government Advocate for State of Madhya Pradesh on advance notice. Heard on admission. Initially engaged for a fixed term till 30.04.1995 by order dated 28.03.1995 against the post of Assistant Teacher and disengaged thereafter, the petitioner after a period of 18 years has filed this writ petition seeking direction to respondents to consider him for re-appointment as Samvida Shala Shikshak. The direction is being sought on the strength of the order passed by the Division Bench in Smt. Miradevi Rai and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others : L.P.A.48/2002 decided on 23.10.2003. The Letters Patent Appeal, as apparent from the order was directed against the order dated 11.01.2002 passed in writ petition 6926/2000 and batch of other petitions. The subject matter of writ petitions was selection of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III, Janpad Panchayat R...
Deependra Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: H ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
Writ Petition No :: 3326 / 2013 Deependra Mishra versus State of MP and others 02.01.2014. Shri Rahul Tripathi for the petitioner. Smt. D.K.Bohrey, Panel Lawyer, for State. Shri Kamlesh Dwivedi for respondent No.2. None for respondent No.3. Petitioner was a student who was granted admission to the B.Ed CouRs.in the Academic Session 2007-08, and contending that the result of the petitioner 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 D.P.Chaturvedi Degree College of Commerce, Arts and Education, Seoni, 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 ...
Madhusudan Prasad Mishra Vs. Union of India Judgement Given By: Hon'bl ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
Writ Petition No.14990/2013. 2.1.2014. Shri Shailesh Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner. Shri O.P.Namdeo, learned counsel for the respondents no.1 and 2 on advance notice. Heard. Grievance raised by the petitioner is in respect of inaction on the part of the respondent no.1 in referring industrial dispute for adjudication before Labour Court. The petitioner, a Crane Operator in Amlohri Projects, Northern Coalfield Limited, Singrauli raised an industrial dispute on 22.8.2013 through trade union BKKSS (BMs.in respect of promotion to the post of Dumper Operator Category VI as also payment of dues for the period from 11.4.1999 to 7.6.1999. The matter was seized by respondent no.2-Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central).Shahdol in conciliation. Respondent no.3 was noticed however, no settlement was arrived at. Respondent no.2 submitted a failure report to respondent no.1 on 8.8.2003. It is the contention of the petitioner that since the matter was not referred to for adjudication to the...
Dev Singh Lodhi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Ho ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-02-2014
Writ Petition No :: 17152 / 2013 Dev Singh Lodhi versus State of MP and others 02.01.2014. Shri Santosh Kumar Singh for the petitioner. Smt. D.K.Bohrey, Panel Lawyer, for State. Shri Mahendra Pateriya for respondent No.2. Shri K.K.Singh for respondent No.3. None for respondent Nos.4 and 5. Petitioner was a student who was granted admission to the B.Ed CouRs.in the Academic Session 2007-08, and contending that the result of the petitioner 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 Mata Vaishno Devi B.Ed College, Hoshangabad, 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...