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.
Balvant Rao Vs. Harishankar (D)thr Lrs Smt. Nirupa Baraskar Judgement ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
WRIT PETITION No.3604/2012 1 13.02.2014 Shri A.K.Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 17.08.2011 passed in Misc. Civil Appeal No.6/2011 by the I Additional Judge to the Court of V Additional District Judge (Fast Track).Chhindwada, arising out of order dated 16.02.2009 passed in Civil Suit No.59-A/2008 by the I Civil Judge, Class-II, Chhindwada, granting a temporary injunction in favour of the respondent/ plaintiff. Facts giving rise to filing of this writ petition are that the respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for partition, declaration and permanent injunction against the petitioner alleging that the suit property being joint Hindu family property, was to be divided amongst the members of the joint family but the defendant No.1, petitioner herein, has executed a sale-deed on 30.05.2008 transferring the property to the other defendants. It is ...
Smt. Annapurna Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
Criminal Revision No.36/2013 13.2.2014 Shri Ashish Singh Parihar, counsel for the applicant. Shri S.D.Khan, G.A.for the State. Heard on admission. The applicant has challenged the judgment 4.12.2012 passed by learned Additional Judge to FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Sehore in Criminal Appeal No.67/2012 whereby the appellate Court reduced the sentence of the respondents no.2 to 4. The prosecution's case is that the applicant Annapurna Bai had purchased a house from Dulichand and Bhawarji in village Khandawa. On 19.10.2010 at about 6.00 a.m, a quarrel initiated and it is alleged that the respondents no.2 to 4 had assaulted the victim Annapurna Bai. She sustained a fracture in her right thumb. The learned JMFC after considering the evidence adduced before him convicted the respondents no.2 to 4 for offence punishable under Section 325 read with Section 34 of I.P.C and sentenced them with three months simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.300/- each. In Criminal Appeal the appellate Court ...
Chotelal Vs. Forest Division Officer Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
W.P.No.11069/2010(S) 1 (Chotelal Dubey versus Forest Division Officer and another) 13/02/2014. Shri Vinay Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Petitioner claims to have been appointed as daily wages employee on 01/08/1984. Vide order dated 08/05/2010 the petitioner was retired from service on the ground that he has attained 60 years as his date of birth is 25/06/1950. Contending that the date of birth of the petitioner is only 25/06/1954 and is not 25/06/1950 as recorded by the Government and placing reliance on a birth certificate Annexure P/4 issued by the Office of the Registrar of Birth and Death on 09/07/2010, petitioner has filed this writ petition on 09/08/2010 i.e.three months after his retirement. Record indicates that based on the entries made in the record by the respondents while the petitioner was appointed in the year 1984, he has been retired treating his date of birth to be 25/06/1950 when the order of retirement Annexure P/1 was passed on 08/05/2010, petitioner ...
Ram Bharose Parte Vs. Secretary the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
1 W.P. No.9800/2010 13.2.2014 Shri Brajesh Choubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S. Bisen, learned Govt. Advocate for respondent State of M.P. on advance notice. Claiming parity with Rajkumar Singh Thakur and Devlal Jhariya, petitioners in W.P. No. 4994/2010, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order as is passed in the cases of Rajkumar Singh Thakur and Devlal Jharia be passed in this petition. Writ Petition No. 4994/2010 was also directed against the order dated 1.1.2010, impugned herein, which was decided on 30.10.2013 in the following terMs."Petitioners were regularized in service vide order Annexure P3 dated 25.10.2008. Their regularization was ordered without considering the fact that petitioner Rajkumar Singh Thakur was appointed on 29.7.92 and petitioner Devlal Jharia was appointed on 26.12.95 and they had completed 10 years of service. As contemplated ...
Bharat Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shr ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
M.Cr.C.No.2179/2014 Bharat & Anr. versus State of MP1302/2014 Shri Ramesh Tamrakar, learned counsel for the applicants. Shri Alok Tapikar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. Heard on I.A.No.3000/2014. Apprehending their arrest in Crime No.188/2013 for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323 & 294 of IPC, applicants have filed this application under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code. Applicants along with the co-accused Prahlad Singh and Sunil Singh are said to have committed the offence and it is seen that in the case of co-accused Prahlad Singh and Sunil Singh in M.Cr.C.No.1281/2014, a bench of this Court on 30 th of January, 2014 considered the matter in detail and found that the incident took place because of the action on the part of the both, the complainants and the applicants herein. Counter cases have been registered and after taking note of the injury sustained by the victim concerned one Govind, it is found that the injury at best would fall under Sec...
Praveen Kumar Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given B ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
W.P.No.2045/2014. 1 13/02/2014. Shri Ajit Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Nirmala Nayak, Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 5/State. Shri Mukesh Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and 6. Petitioner, an employee in Gramin Vidyut Sahakari Samiti, Rewa vide this petition seeks direction to respondents particularly respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and 6 to give the benefit of higher pay scale and also the benefit of 5th Pay Commission to the petitioner from the date of his entitlement and after completion of 10 and 20 years of service with all services benefit including arreaRs.The relief is being sought on the basis of decision rendered in Uma Shankar Dwivedi versus M.P.State Electricity Board and others in W.P.No.5458/2011 decided on 4.3.2014 which was later on affirmed in W.A.No.415/2013 (M.P.State Electricity Board and others V. Uma Shankar Dwivedi).Since parity is being drawn with Uma Shankar Dwivedi and that the petitioner instead of approaching t...
Ram Prasad Ahirwar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
W.P.No.11096/2010. 1 (Ram Prasad Ahirwar versus State of M.P.& otheRs.13/02/2014. Shri Munish Saini, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents/State on advance notice. Petitioner is working as a Safaiwala, he was engaged by the department on 25/10/1990, suddenly he was disengaged w.e.f.28 th March, 2000. According to the petitioner he was disengaged and thereafter a circular dated 28/07/2000 issued by the Finance Department permitting for re-engagement of such employee. It is stated that even though petitioner has been re- engaged on payment of fixed salary of Rs.1000/- per month vide Annexure P/5 but the benefit of regular service and regularization has not been granted to him instead various other persons have been considered for regularization and certain benefits of payment of salary has already been granted to them. Shri Rahul Jain, Deputy Advocate General submits that the petitioner is only engaged as part time safaiwala for ...
Ashok Kumar Gupta Vs. Snehlata Shrivastava Judgement Given By: Hon'ble ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
Con.C.No.425/2008. (Ashok Kumar Gupta versus Snehlate Shrivastava & otheRs.1 13/02/2014. Shri Abhilash Day, learned counsel for the applicants. Shri Samdarshi Tiwari and Shri Pranay Choubey, Advocates for the respondents/ contemnORS.Complaining disobedience of the order passed in W.P.No.2491/2005 vide Annexure C/2 on 25/04/2005 and in W.A.No.740/2007 on 13/02/2008 vide Annexure C/1, this application has been field for initiating action for contempt. Applicants were working in a private aided institute and the dispute pertaining to payment of salary and interest to them. The petitions have been disposed of by the writ court and appellate court and directions have been issued for payment of salary, arrears and interest during pendency of these matters since 2008. Compliance have been reported, salary have been paid and now only dispute is with regard to payment of interest. The respondents were directed to file a detailed affidavit and indicates as to why interest has not been paid Con.C...
Raghuveer Yadav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given By: Ho ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
Raghuveer Yadav versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.2558 / 2014 13.2.2014: Shri Narendra Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.P.Rai, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Petitioner was appointed as a Deputy Teacher in the year 1973 on a fixed salary of Rs.100/-. Thereafter in the year 1983 he was regularized and brought in the regular establishment in the then existing pay-scale of Rs.545-925/-. It is said that the fiRs.time bond promotion was also granted to the petitioner with effect from the date of his grant of regular pay and second time bound promotion was also granted, on such consideration claiming regular salary from the initial date of appointment in the year 1973 and fiRs.time bound promotion and second time bound promotion after completing 12 and 24 years of service with reference to his initial date of appointment in the year 1983, petitioner has filed this writ petition. It is pointed out that in the case of one Narendra Pratap Singh versus State...
Ramesh Prasad Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Judgement Given B ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-13-2014
Ramesh Prasad Mishra & ORS.versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.21146 / 2013 13.2.2014: Shri S.K.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri S.P.Rai, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. It is stated in the petition that in terms of the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Janpad Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1998, the petitioners would be entitled to grant of regular pay scale of the post of Shiksha Karmi. However, such a claim is not being considered, therefore, this writ petition is required to be filed. It is further stated that identical claim was made before the Indore Bench of this Court in W.P.No.602/2010 (S) by certain teachers of the similar category namely Mohanlal & others and the said writ petition has been disposed of vide order dated 22.01.2010 directing consideration of the claim of the persons like petitioners and, therefore, similar treatment may be given to the petitioneRs.This Court in the case of Mohanlal (supra) has passed...
- ‹ Prev
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Next ›
- Last »