SHEEL NAGU, S.A.DHARMADHIKARI
Malkhan Singh Malviya – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent
SHEEL NAGU, J.
1. The instant intra court appeal filed under Section 2(i) of M.P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 (hereinafter referred as “2005 Act”) assails the final order dated 26.09.2017 passed in WP.1029 /2009 whereby the learned single judge while exercising the writ jurisdiction u/ Art. 226 of the Constitution of India has dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner/appellant seeking quashment of order dated 27.01.2010 (Annexure P-6) by which his contractual services as a Peon, under the Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha Mission, continuing since 1997, have been terminated.
2. Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.
3. The writ Court while dismissing the petition in question found that a show cause notice dated 13.01.2009 (Annexure P-4) was issued asking the petitioner to respond to the allegation of misconduct alleged therein or else the service would stand terminated. Learned single Judge further found that FIR was also registered alleging offences punishable u/Ss. 406, 409, 420 of IPC on 12.01.2009 arising out of same incident which gave rise to the said alleged misconduct. The writ court after considering the submission of learned cou
Chandra Prakash Shahi Vs. State of U.P. & Ors
Dipti Prakash Banerjee Vs. Satvendra Nath Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences, Calcutta & ors.
Khem Chand Vs. Union of India & ors.
Radheshyam Gupta Vs. U.P. Industries Agro
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.