Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : (1955)ILLJ402MP
Nevaskar, J.1. This and other petitions Nos. 22, 30, 32, 37, 39 and 40 of 1953 involve the same questions. All these aforesaid petitions are submitted by the several petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of mandamus or certiorari and for a decision that the order of the Government of Madhya Bharat, dated 16 December 1952, issued against them directing their removal from the judicial service of the State to be of no effect and that they still continue in the service of the State.2. I consider it convenient to consider the case of the petitioner Vijay Shankar for the decision of the questions involved in all these petitions, because after these questions are decided with reference to this petition that decision could be applied to other cases, although there may be some variation as regards some facts not material for the present purpose.3. Petitioner Vijay Shankar set forth in his petition that he had been in the service of Rajgarh State of C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1957MP60
ORDERNewaskar, J. 1. This is a Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of writs of quo-warranto and prohibition submitted by one Rajendrakumar Jain of Ujjain, claiming to be a bona fide resident of the State of Madhya Pradesh and a candidate for membership of the Senate of the Madhya Bharat Vikram University, against the State of Madhya Pradesh, the Government of Madhya Pradesh, the Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor, the Registrar, Assistant Registrar and Dr. Boolchand, Special Officer of the Madhya Bharat Vikram University. 2. The petitioner's allegations are that the legislature of erstwhile State of Madhya Bharatpassed an Act known as Madhya Bharat VikramUniversity Act, No. 18 of 1955 and the said Act received the assent of Rajpramukh on 17-6-1955, that this Act, which was published in the Madhya Bharat Government Gazette dated 25-6-1955, by Section 1 Sub-section (2) provided ''it shall come into force on such date as the Government may, by notification i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : [1960]39ITR429(MP)
In the view we are taking of the preliminary objection in this case, it is not necessary to give any but the main facts.The Income-tax Investigation Commission started a case against the petitioner, in which the latter offered a settlement and agreed that 'in case any other item of income comes to light in the future, the Commission shall be free to report the same and the Department to assess it in accordance with law.' The Commission favourably considered the terms and recommended that no proceedings by way of penalty or prosecution be taken against him. The order of the Commission is exhibit P-2 and the application for settlement exhibit P-1. The Central Government having accepted he terms and conditions of settlement, they were ordered to be recorded under section 8-A of the Taxation on Income (Investigation Commission) Act, and the case to be disposed of by the Commission. This was on September 29, 1950.On August 5, 1954, the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle I, Nagpur, issued se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959MP58
M. Hidayatullah, C.J. 1. This appeal arises out of an election in the Sehore double-member constituency to the Legisla-tive Assembly of this State. The election took place on 25th February, 1957 and the results were declared on 1st March, 1957. Originally, six persons had offered to contest the two seats, but one of them (Amarchand) withdrew, leaving five in the field. Of these Umraosingh and Mannulal contested the reserved seat, while the remaining three, Inayatullah, Mahajan, and Nandlal contested the general seat. As a result of the poll declared on 1st March, the appellant Inayatullah was declared elected to the general seat while Umraosingh was also declared elected to the reserved seat. The result of the poll was as follows : Umraosingh 23,757Votes(Reserved) Inapatullah 20,696,,(General) C. Mahajan 20,616,,(General) Mannulal 16,599'(Reserved Nandlal 8,997,,(General)) 2. The election was questioned by Diwan-chand Mahajan alone. One of the other candidates Mannulal in his reply rai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959MP259; 1959CriLJ844
Naik, J.1. The accused-appellant Ramdulare has been convicted by the fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for committing the murder of Chhedilal, alias Chiddi Nai on the morning of 4-1-1957 at his own house in Uprenganj, Jabalpur, and sentenced to imprisonment for 'life. His appeal is that on the facts established he ought to have been held of 'unsound mind within the meaning of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code and consequently exempted from criminal responsibility for the aforesaid murder. (sic) within the meaning of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code was the only defence raised at the trial. That section lays down:'Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act. or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.'2. A Division Bench of this Court in State v. Chhotelal Criminal Ref. No. 26 of 1957 D/- 20-11-1957 :...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959MP43; (1959)IILLJ187MP
H.R. Krishnan, J.1. This is an application by a Sub-Inspector of Police who was dismissed by the Order of the Deputy Inspector General Police, Northern Range (M. B.) after show cause notices, inquiry and report by the S. P. Guna. The gravamen of his case is that because he was appointed by the I. G. of Police of the erstwhile Gwalior State, and after the constitution of the Madhya Bharat confirmed by that Government in its services, his dismissal by the D. I. G. is illegal and in contravention of Article 311(1) of the Constitution as this authority is subordinate in rank both to the State Government and to the I. G. of Police Madhya Bharat.He has also urged that the conduct of the inquiry was in contravention of the provisions of the Punishment and Appeal Rules, the Madhya Bharat Police Act and Police Regulations (paragraph 234). Accordingly, he has prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the D. I. G., and directing the grant of all consequential reliefs.2. The m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959MP136; (1959)ILLJ512MP
M. Hidayatullah, C.J. 1. The petitioner Jagannath Prasad Saxena was serving as an assistant geologist in the Vindhya Pradesh State till 18th June 1956 when he received an order of the Lieutenant Governor, Vindhya Pradesh, terminating his services on payment of his salary for the period of notice admissible to him under the rules. It is this order which he questions in this petition. To understand, however, his case it is necessary to set out the facts at some length. 2. Rewa State granted him a stipend to study a course of geology at Lucknow University. Under the agreement executed by him, he was to serve the state after completing his University education for a period of five years. On 19th August 1949, having obtained the degree of M.Sc. (Geology) from the University, he was appointed as assistant geologist to that State. Annexure 1 to the petition is the order appointing him. Jagannath Prasad Saxena was to get a time scale of Rs. 300--15--450 with effect from the date he joined his ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1961MP84
Bhutt, C.J. 1. This appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, (hereinafter called the Act), has been filed by Naunihalsingh, an elector, whose petition challenging the election of Kishorilal Paliwal, respondent 1, and Nabha, respondent 2, to the Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly from Gadarwara Double Member Constituency, for the general and reserved seat respectively, was dismissed by the Election Tribunal, Hoshangabad. The returned candidates have filed a cross-objection for costs. 2. Kishorilal Paliwal and Nabha, respondents 1 and 2, were set up as candidates for the election by the Congress party for the general and reserved seat respectively of the Gadarwara Double Member Constituency. Niranjansingh, respondent 3, and Gokul, respondent 4, were likewise set up for election to the general and reserved seat respectively, by the Praja Socialist Party, Ramgulam, respondent 5, and Ramchand Paliwal, respondent 6, were independent candidates for the general...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959MP353
Shrivastava, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by which the petitioner seeks a writ against the non-applicants to compel them to complete the election to the office of the President Municipal Committee, Katni, District Jabalpur. 2. The Collector Jabalpur had published a programme of election to the Municipality of Katni according to which the nomination papers had to be filed by 12-5-1958 and the polling was to take place on 13-6-1958. The petitioner filed his nomination paper for contesting the office of President on 5-5-1958. Section 18 of the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Municipalities Act) provided for the election of the President directly by all the voters. It was, however, amended by the Madhya Pra-desh Municipalities (Amendment) Act, 1958 (Act No. 14 of 1958) which came into force on 5-5-1958. By this amendment the President is now to be elected by the members of the Committee. Section 7 of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1960MP130
ORDERShiv Dayal, J.1. This revision raises an interesting point. The question is whether the Rules made by the High Court at Nagpur in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 122 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter called 'The Code') and which were in force in the former State of Madhya Pradesh as it existed before the Reorganization of States on 1-11-1956, are enforceable in that territory of the new Madhya Pradesh which upto 31-10-1950 was called the Part B State of Madhya Bharat.2. The material facts are these. In execution of a decree against Kailash Chandm (judgment-debtor), Akabai (decree-holder) got his house attached. Munnilal and others filed an objection petition under Order 21 Rule 58 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 13-3-1959. Without deciding that petition, the executing Court fixed 1-7-1959, for the sale of the house. The objectors then filed an application on May 8, 1959 praying that the sale be stayed until the disposal of their objection petition. The e...
Tag this Judgment!