SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(MP) 379

NANDITA DUBEY
Ramkaran Dwivedi – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Shobhit Aditya for petitioner;
Sheetal Tiwari, Panel Lawyer for respondent/State

ORDER

1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged his order of dismissal from service dated 12.12.2005 (Annexure P-15) and also the order dated 29.5.2006 (Annexure P-18), whereby the appeal preferred by him against the order of dismissal has been rejected.

2. Facts of the case as pleaded and relevant for the purpose are that the petitioner was posted as Patwari Halka No.36, Hanumana, district Rewa from July 1995 to January 1999. The Tahsildar, Hanumana vide order dated 27.11.1996 (Annexure P-1) issued direction to call for a detailed enquiry report from the Halka Patwari in case Nos. 27/A-6-A/96-97 filed by Rameshwar Prasad and Raj Karan Pandey and case No. 28/A-6-A/96-97, filed by Uma Kant Tripathi with regard to the application filed under section 115 and 116 of the M.P.L.R.C. for correction in column 3 of the khasra entries of the khasras mentioned in the applications. It is alleged that the petitioner after spot inspection and panchnama, submitted his report confirming the possession of applicants on the lands in question. The Tehsildar, Hanumana, after recording oral and documentary evidence and on the basis of the Patwari r

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top