Madhya Pradesh Court February 2014 Judgments
Savitri Uikey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon' ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
W.P.No.3075/2014 28.02.2014 Ms.Sudha Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate, for the respondents/State. The petitioners claim 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 petitioners 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, the appeal filed by writ petitioners su...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Pratap Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
W.P.No.3380/2014 28.02.2014 Shri Ajay Pal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the respondents, on advance copy. Heard finally. The only grievance of the petitioner is that pursuance to an order dated 20.07.2012 the petitioner was posted in the Directorate of Public Instructions, Bhopal, where he took over the charge on 23.07.2012. All of a sudden without there being any rhyme or reason, by impugned order dated 18.02.2014 he has been transferred to the Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Ichhawar, District Sehore, and is sought to be relieved immediately. It is contended that the mid term transfer of the petitioner is against the policy of transfer made by the State Government. Further, the petitioner is the President of recognized Employees Association and, therefore, he was entitled to grant of exemption from transfer for a period of four yeaRs.It is contended that claim of the petitioner is to be considered for his promo...
Tag this Judgment!Vinay Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'b ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Revision No.2085/2010 Vinay Pandey and Others VERSUS State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Satish Chaturvedi, counsel for the applicants. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 28th day of February, 2014) The applicants were convicted for two counts charges of offence punishable under section 323 of IPC and each of them was sentenced with fine of Rs.1,000/- for each count charge vide judgment dated 21.7.2009 passed by the learned JMFC, Rewa in criminal case No.350/2005, whereas criminal appeal No.237/2009 was dismissed in toto vide order dated 23.4.2010 passed by the learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid judgments, the applicants have preferred the present revisio...
Tag this Judgment!Sheo Narayan Nagar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
W.P.No.7900/2013 28.2.2014 Shri D.K.Dixit, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Govt. Advocate for respondents. It appears that the respondent No.2 has virtually no respects and regards towards the direction issued by this Court as it is informed by learned Govt. Advocate that the communication in this respect were sent to the concerned authority, but no response has been given. This Court on 21.10.2013 has specifically directed that since the petitioner was to retire on 31.10.2013, if his service book was not available, it be reconstituted on or before 31.11.2013 and an information in this respect be given. The case was directed to be listed on 2.12.2013. When the matter was posted on 2.12.2013, time was taken for the said purposes and it was again adjourned upto 9.12.2013. Since no report was submitted on 9.12.2013, the case was adjourned granting time to do the needful and it was made clear that in case the report is not filed within the aforesaid period, app...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Kumar JaIn Vs. Digambar JaIn Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
CRR No.980/2009 Criminal Revision No.980/2009 28.2.2014 Shri B.M.Prasad, counsel for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.4. Heard on admission. The applicant has challenged the judgment dated 22.4.2009 passed by the learned 13th Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in criminal appeal No.244/2008, whereby the judgment dated 30.6.2008 passed by the learned JMFC, Jabalpur in criminal case No.514/2002 was reversed and the respondents No.1 to 3 were acquitted from the charges of offence under Section 456 of IPC. The facts of the case, in short, are that, in the night of 3.8.2002, the respondents No.1 to 3 entered in the premises of the applicant and they took various articles of Rs.4 to 5 Lacs from the fiRs.floor of his shop. When the applicant sent a peon to go and clean the premises, he found that ladder was removed and the door of the fiRs.floor was blocked by 3 iron sheets. The applicant lodged an FIR, Ex.P/1 and after due investigation, a charge-s...
Tag this Judgment!Govnid Ram Mendhekar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given B ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
1 Writ Petition No.3387/2014 28.02.2014 Shri B.N.Sharma, learned counsel for petitioneRs.Shri Puneet Shroti, learned Panel Lawyer for respondents-State. Learned counsel for the parties submitted that the controveRs.involved in this case is covered by the judgment of Apex Court in Asha Saxena versus State of M.P.& Others S.L.P.(Civil) No.18881/06 and this case may be decided in the light of aforesaid judgment. 2. The Apex Court in Asha Saxena (Supra) considering the controveRs.involved in the case held thus :- The appellant herein was appointed as a Lecturer in the Government Girls' Higher Secondary School, Mama Ka Bazar, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, on 19.9.1981. Prior to entry into service, the appellant had in 1972 acquired B.Ed. Degree. According to the appellant, at the time of entry into service she was entitled to two advance increments in accordance with a Circular issued by the State Government on 21.9.1974, which reads as follows: "Pointwise clarification of the queries born in co...
Tag this Judgment!Nand Lal Khare Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
W.P.No.657/2009(S) 28.2.2014 Shri D.K.Dixit, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Puneet Shroti, learned Panel Lawyer for respondents. This writ petition was filed in the year 2009 originally by a person, who has retired long back in the year 1994 and whose provident fund account was not settled despite making attempts. The original petitioner has died and his widow has been substituted as the petitioner in the present case. Though the writ petition was entertained, notices were issued to the respondents long back, only a return has been filed by the respondent No.5, the Accountant General Madhya Pradesh, Gwalior (hereinafter referred to as AGMP for brevity).but no return whatsoever has been filed by the State Government denying any of the allegations made in the writ petition. It is the contention of the petitioner that regular deductions were made from his salary towards the provident fund and were to be credited in the accounts with the AGMP, but because of some lapses on the pa...
Tag this Judgment!Radheshyam Chandravanshi Vs. Om Prakash Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Sh ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
M.Cr.C.No.3240/2010 M.Cr.C.No.3240/2010 28.2.2014 Shri Akhilesh Jain, counsel for the applicant. Heard on admission. The applicant has preferred the present application for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 24.2.2010 passed by the learned JMFC, Seoni, whereby the respondent was acquitted from the charge of offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The facts of the case, in short, are that the applicant has preferred a complaint before the trial Court that a sum of Rs.75,000/- was to be given to the applicant by the respondent and therefore, he gave a cheque dated 8.1.2005. When the cheque was deposited in the Bank of Maharashtra, it was dishonoured due to unavailability of funds. A notice of demand was given but, within the stipulated period, no demand has been made and therefore, the complaint was filed. The respondent abjured his guilt. He took a plea that he took a sum of Rs.20,000/- from the applicant, which was returned to him. A blank cheque was g...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Kumar JaIn Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
M.Cr.C.No.2127/2010 M.Cr.C.No.2127/2010 28.2.2014 Shri B.M.Prasad, counsel for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.1. Heard on admission. The applicant has preferred the present application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.against the order dated 21.12.2009 passed by the learned 11th Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in criminal revision No.137/2009, whereby the revision was dismissed and the judgment dated 16.3.2009 passed by the learned JMFC, Jabalpur in criminal case No.1308/2004 was confirmed, in which the respondents No.2 to 4 were acquitted from the charges of offence punishable under Sections 448 and 427 of IPC. After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be apparent that the applicant found that some scrap was lying in front of his shop and in the night someone had entered in his premises and wall of the well was broken and well was filled up w...
Tag this Judgment!Satish Kumar Verma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2014
W.P.No.14159/2006 & CONC No.353/2011 W.P.No.14159/2006 & CONC No.353/2011 28.02.2014 Petitioner in person. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, Government Advocate for the respondents/State. Shri Anshuman Singh, Advocate for the respondent No.8. The issue brought before us in this public interest litigation is about unauthorized occupation and encroachment on Government land which has been earmarked for the construction of Medical University. In spite of directions given by this Court in the present proceedings it appears that quite a few structures are still standing on KhaSr.Nos.316 and 317, which is part of the said project of Medical University. Because of these obstructions the construction of Medical University is being delayed indefinitely, which cannot be countenanced. The construction of Medical University is in larger public interest and it cannot brook delay. When called upon to explain, the learned counsel for the State submits that the structures, which could not be removed from KhaSr.N...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »