Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1984MP64
ORDERK.N. Shukla, J. 1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the Order dated 26-5-1980 (Annexure D) passed by the Special Secretary, Home (respondent No. 2) rejecting Scheme No. 83 proposed by the petitioner under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act,2. The petitioner Corporation is a State Transport Undertaking established under Section 3 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950. Petitioner Corporation published Scheme No, 83 under the provisions of Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (the Act hereinafter) in the Madhya Pradesh Rajpatra dated 10-2-1978 for exclusive operation of its stage carriages on the routes or portions thereof as stated in Clause (2) of the Scheme (Annexure A). The area and the routes under the Scheme fall within the jurisdiction of Regional Transport Authority (R. T. A.), Raipur. The petitioner also got the scheme published in Hindi daily 'NAV-BHARAT' dated 15-2-1978 whic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1993MP118
S.K. Chawla, J. 1. The question involved in this, writ petition is, whether a consumer of high tension indudstrial power, on account of interrupted supply of electrical energy due to power cuts, is relieved of the obligation to pay minimum monthly charges and is liable to pay only to the extent of electrical energy actually consumed by him?2. The petitioner, M's. Gwalior Steels Private Limited, is a Company under the Companies Act, 1956, having a Mini Steel Plant at Banmore, District Morena. M. P. manufacturing special alloy steel castings and Section. The plant was granted high tension industrial power connection by Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board (respondent herein) under an agreement, Annexure A. It was undertaken under the agreement that the petitioner would be supplied electricity for a load of 3500 K.V.A. (Kilo Volt Amperes) on 33 K.V. That demand of electricity having been contracted to be supplied is called 'contract demand', a phrase which may have to he used in discussion he...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2001(1)MPHT154
ORDERS.C. Pandey, J. 1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 13-1-1997 (Annexure P-18) passed by respondent No. 4. Additional Collector, Raipur and the order dated 24-7-1996 (Annexure P-11) passed by respondent No. 2, Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) and Prescribed Authority, Saraipali, District Raipur so far as it relates to direction of recovery of the amount mentioned in that order.2. The petitioner Smt. Johara Dayal was elected as the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Basna, Block Basna, Tahsil Saraipali, District Raipur. It appears that the respondent No. 2, Sub- Divisional Officer received complaint against the petitioner regarding the certain illegalities and irregularities performed by her in her capacity as Sarpanch. It appears that respondent Nos. 5 to 9, the Panchas were also complainants against the petitioner. Accordingly, a show-cause notice under Section 40 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1995MP188
ORDERT.S. Doabia, J. 1. 'We must, as a united people keep ablaze in this continent the flames of human liberty, reason, democracy and fair play as living things to be preserved for the better world that is to come'. This was what President Roosevelt of America said in his new year message in 1940. Indeed fair play and reason are the twin ideals which must be preserved for a better future of this Great Nation which is surging forward to enter 21st Century on the basis of an electoral system which is the largest and has no parallel on this planet.2. The concept of democracy as visualised by the Constitution presupposes the representation of people in Governmental functions through the medium of elected representatives. The constitutional machinery which was visualised by the founding fathers restricted this machinery to the Parliament and State Legislatures. By Constitution seventy-third and seventy-fourth Amendment Acts of 1992 similar superstructure has been provided to conduct electio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1970MP230; 1970MPLJ253
Bishambhar Dayal, C.J.1. Thispetition arises out of a Motor Vehicles case and has been referred to a Full Bench because of an apparent conflict of views in different Division Benches of this Court on the question whether the State Transport Appellate Authority can remand a case to the Regional Transport Authority for a reconsideration of the matter when evidence is already on record and the State Transport Appellate Authority can dispose of the case on merits.2. The brief facts which have given rise to this writ petition are that the Regional Transport Authority, Rewa, advertised for applications for one permit on the Panna-Jabalpur route, 35 operators applied before the Regional Transport Authority. On the 24th June, 1963 the Regional Transport Authority granted a permit to Surendra Mohan Chaurasiya, who has filed the present petition, and dismissed the other applications. Out of the operators whose applications had been rejected, 12 persons filed appeals before the State Transport Ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1958MP103
M. Hidayatullah, C.J.1. The following question has been referred for the opinion of the Full Bench :'Can a writ of this High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution be issued to bind the Central Government in a case in which' under the Mineral Concession Rules, 1949 the Central Government has declined to review an order passed by the State Government?'2. The reference came to be made under the following circumstances. The appellant Seth Surajmal applied for a mining lease in respect of 20.45 acres in village Botejhari, tahsil Waraseoni, district Balaghat. The application of Seth Surajmal was dismissed by the State Government and the State Government's decision was communicated to Seth Surajmal by the Deputy Commissioner, Balaghat, in memorandum No. 1381-7438-7-kh dated 27-12-1954 under endorsement No. K. Kh. Li. dated 19th January 1955. I reproduce the memorandum here:'20.45 acres. area thrown open vide notification in C. P Gazette part 3, page 8,dated 7-1-55. Application to be rec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1962MP315; [1963]14STC67(MP)
Dixit, C.J.1. This is an application under Article 228 of the Constitution or the issue of a writ of certiorari for quashing three re-assessment orders under Section 19 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, in respect of three years from 1957 to 1960, imposing a total amount of Rs. 23,1 4.19 nP. as tax and penalty on the petitioner.2. The petitioner was in the normal course assessed to sales tax for three years included in the period from 24th October, 1957 to 19th October, 1960. On 17th October, 1961 three notices in respect of the three accounting years stated above were issued to the petitioner under Section 19 of the Act for escaped assessment. The notices directed the petitioner to appear before the Sales Tax Officer with account-books for the period. It was mentioned in the notices that they had been issued on the basis of a report made by Shri Ghai, the Sales Tax Inspector. It appears that on 10th October, 1961, the Sales Tax inspector paid a visit to the shop of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 1991(0)MPLJ386
ORDERV.D. Gyani, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners-Company engaged in manufacture and supply of intravenous fluids to various hospitals, including hospitals attached to Medical Colleges, challenges the governmental order dated 17-7-1989 [filed by the petitioner as Annexure-R/3(4)], thereby directing purchases of intravenous fluids for hospitals atttached to Medical Colleges from respondent No. 4-M/s. Hindusthan Antibiotic Ltd., Pimpri, alone, and the State action in issuing such orders to M/s. Hindusthan Antibiotic Ltd., as wholly arbitrary, discriminatory, grossly violative of the right of equality, guaranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution of India.2. Before proceeding any further, it would be desirable to deal with an objection in the nature of a preliminary objection as raised by the respondent No. 4 as regards maintainability of the petition itself for alleged violation of executive instructions, issued by the State Government...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2005(1)MPHT117; 2004(3)MPLJ316
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as a Lower Division Clerk on 22-8-1964 and was promoted to the post of Upper Division Clerk Grade-II on 27-7-79. He passed the Accountants Training Examination on 30-4-80 and was promoted as Accountant on 30-6-82 and retired as Accountant on 31-3-98 on attaining the age of superannuation.2. According to the writ petitioner he was getting the pay scale of Accountant of Rs. 1320-2040/-. As setforth, the feeder post for cadre of Accountant as per Madhya Pradesh Class III (Ministerial) Forest Service Recruitment Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') is Upper Division Clerk Grade-II the pay scale of which is Rs. 1200-2040/-. It is urged that the pay scale of State employees have been revised with effect from 1-1-1996 vide Notification No. 6-27-2-CR-98, dated 9- 3-98 issued by the competent authority. It is urged in the petition that certain clarifications were issued vide Annexure A- 1, dated 3-2-2001 wherein Rule 10 (2) of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2008MP328
Dipak Misra, J.1. The spinal and centroidal issue that has spiralled to this Court for the purpose of adjudication in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Arts. 226/227 of the Constitution of India is whether the Additional District Judge has the inherent jurisdiction to hear the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the 1996 Act') in view of the language employed under Sections 2(1)(e) and 42 of the said enactment or it is the District Judge alone who has the jurisdiction to deal with the lis.2. The facts which are absolutely imperative to be exposited for the purpose of adjudication of the controversy are that four agreements were signed between the petitioners, namely, Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board and Madhya Pradesh Power Generation Company Limited and the respondents on the basis of a letter of intent issued in favour of the respondent No. 1 on 11-5-1999. In pursuance of the execution of the agreement, the respo...
Tag this Judgment!