Madhya Pradesh Court February 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.
Ashwini Kumar Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given B ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
WRIT PETITION No.11442/2013 1 20.02.2014 Shri Rahul Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Puneet Shroti, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents-State. I.A. No.1107/2014 is filed for the purpose of correcting the error committed in the cause title of the writ petition. The same is considered and allowed. Let the correction be incorporated during the course of the day. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, heard finally. The only claim made by the petitioner is that though he had completed 24 years of service but was not granted second Kramonnati only on the ground that the petitioner was given promotion in between the period he was granted the first Kramonnati in the pay scale. It is contended that the promotion will not come in the way of the petitioner, if the same is made on the same pay scale as the scheme formulated on 17.03.1999/19.04.1999 is a scheme for advancement in the pay scale and not for grant of promotion. It is contended that such an issue has...
Ramcharan Ahirwar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
1 W.P.3002/2014. 20.2.2014. Shri Rahul Rawat, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, learned G.A.for the respondents. The petitioner sought the following reliefs : 1. Writ in nature of Certiorari be issued quashing the notification under Section 4 and declaration under Section 6 vide dated 4.1.2014. 2. Direction be issued to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner and the place of dame may kindly be replaced from Ramgarh to Pareva River as per the earlier survey conducted in the year 1979-80. 3. That, the Hon'ble Court may issue any other appropriate writ or direction as the court deems fit in the interest of justice. The contention of the petitioner is that the Dam may be directed to be constructed not at the present place but at some other place as Dam would be submerging the agricultural land of various villages namely Vaharian Khirak, Kasa Khirak, Cahduvakhera Khirak and some other villages. It is submitted that a representation Ann. P.6...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Munnalal Mishra Judgement Given By: Ho ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
- 1 -1 M.Cr.C.No.849/2010 20/2/2014 : Shri Umesh Pandey, learned Govt. Advocate for the applicant State. This application has been filed by the State Government under Section 378(III) Cr.P.C.seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 28.10.2009 passed by Special Judge, NDPS Act, Damoh in Special Case No.6/2007 whereby respondent has been acquitted of charges leveled against him under Section 8(G) and 20(Kha)(II).of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985. It is said that the police authorities through a informer on 26.9.2007 received information with regard to illegal storage of Ganja in the residential house of respondent accused situated in Satna. Accordingly, an entry was made in Rojnamcha Sanha and on search 2kg 100 gm Ganja was seized from the house of the respondent. It is said that all procedure was followed but he has been acquitted. Taking me through the statement of witnesses and other material available on record, learned counsel for the State Government...
Narmada Prasad Sahu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
Writ Appeal No.117/2014 20.02.2014 Shri R.S.Saini, learned learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned Govt. Adv for respondents. IA No.1796/14, an application for condonation of delay. There is delay of seven days in filing this appeal. For the reasons stated in the application, supported by an affidavit, the delay is condoned. Heard on the question of admission. The sole contention of the appellant is that he was punished twice for the misconduct, one by way of punishment of withholding of increments and another by non payment of full salary during the period in which the appellant had remained suspended. It is submitted that for one misconduct, the appellant cannot be punished twice. From the perusal of the record, we find that allegations against the appellant were in respect of non providing food, breakfast, adequate light arrangement to the students, who were residing in the hostel because of which twenty five students had left the hostel. After the enquiry, i...
Rajesh JaIn Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'bl ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
- 1 -1 M.Cr.C.No.4907/2013 20/2/2014 : Shri Som Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Aditya Adhikari with Shri P. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the respondent. Challenging the order dated 21.3.2013 passed by the Special Judge, Lokayukt, Damoh in Special Case No.3/13 Annexure A/1 refusing to grant relief to the present applicant and refusing to interfere with an order passed by the respondent Lokayukt Organization in the matter of interfering with the business activities of the applicant and restraining him from operating his bank account, this application has been filed. Facts which have come on record goes to show that the Special Police Establishment, Sagar has registered a Crime bearing No.167/2012 for offences under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act against one Kapil Khare, who at the relevant point of time when the criminal case was registered was working as a Sub Engineer, Municipal Council, at Damoh. It seems that certain r...
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs. the Union of India and Ors. Judgemen ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
W.P.No.5446/2000 20/2/2014 None appears for the petitioner. None appears for respondents No.1, 2, 3 and 6. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt. Adv.for respondents No.4 and 5. This petition is pending since 2000. More than 14 years have passed and the only question involved in this writ petition is as to who is the appropriate Government in the matter of taking action with regard to the petitioner's establishment under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970. According to the petitioners when this writ petition was filed on 11th September 2000 both the authorities of the Central Government namely respondents No.2, 3 and 6 and the authorities of the State Government were taking action against the petitioner's establishment in the matter of implementing the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970 and as exercise of parallel jurisdiction both by the Central Government and the State Government was infringing the right available to the petition...
Ravi Shankar Nayak Vs. Raja Bhaiya Patel Judgement Given By: Hon'ble S ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
-1- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR Writ Appeal No.1068/2013 Ravi Shankar Nayak Vs. Raja Bhaiya Patel & Others Present: Honble Shri Rajendra Menon, J.& Hon'ble Shri A. K. Sharma, J.______________________________________________________ Shri K. C. Ghildyal, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Anshuman Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.1. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt. Adv. for respondents No.2 and 3 __________________________________________________ ORDER ( ..../2/2014 ) This is an appeal under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 calling in question certain observations and directions issued by the Writ Court in its order dated 5.8.2013 passed in W.P. No.8620/2013.2. Facts in brief goes to show that the Mining Department in the State of Madhya Pradesh issued a -2- auction notice for the purpose of quarrying of sand in an area measuring 14.5 hectares situated in village Paria, Tehsil Gauri...
New Education Society Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
New Education Society versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Appeal No.1283 / 2010 20.2.2014. Shri R.N.Singh, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Manoj Sharma, counsel for the appellant. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Dy. Advocate General for respondents. This appeal under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaya Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 has been filed aggrieved by order dated 22.9.2010 passed by the writ court in W.P.No.12511/2010. The dispute in question pertains to the allegation made by the petitioner society in the matter of encroachment by the state authorities into property and the land belonging to the society and trying to make certain constructions in the aforesaid. Impugned action was being undertaken by the respondents. It is seen that the petitioner filed the writ petition before the writ court, which disposed of the petition merely on the ground that agreement has been executed on behalf of society by the Chairman and, therefore, based of agreement if any ...
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Mushgtaq @ Mubarik Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
- 1 -1 M.Cr.C.No.807/2010 20/2/2014 : Shri Umesh Pandey, learned Govt. Advocate for the applicant State. This application has been filed by the State Government under Section 378(III) Cr.P.C.seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 23.10.2009 passed by Special Judge, NDPS Act, Harda in Special Case No.1/2007 whereby respondent has been acquitted of charges leveled against him under Section 8/20 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985. It is said that the Sub Inspector, Police Station Harda received information on telephone that respondent is going on Hero Honda Motorcycle and is carrying ganja. He was apprehended near Khandwa road and it is said that in search 5.700 gm Ganja was seized from his possession. He was put to prosecution but the learned Special Court having acquitted him, this application has been filed. Taking me through the statement of P.W.9 R.P.Soni the prosecution witness and the Inspector concerned who conduct the operation and that of P.W.1 C...
Ritesh Sharma @ Pintu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-20-2014
M.Cr.C.No.2230/2014 20/2/2014 None appears for the petitioner. None appears for respondents No.1, 2, 3 and 6. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt. Adv.for respondents No.4 and 5. This petition is pending since 2000. More than 14 years have passed and the only question involved in this writ petition is as to who is the appropriate Government in the matter of taking action with regard to the petitioner's establishment under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970. According to the petitioners when this writ petition was filed on 11th September 2000 both the authorities of the Central Government namely respondents No.2, 3 and 6 and the authorities of the State Government were taking action against the petitioner's establishment in the matter of implementing the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970 and as exercise of parallel jurisdiction both by the Central Government and the State Government was infringing the right available to the petit...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »