Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Gandhar V. Singh Thakur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 January, 2016

                            WP-1346-2016
         (GANDHAR V. SINGH THAKUR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


25-01-2016

Ms.Sudha Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Mr.Vikram Johri, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents.

Heard.

In this petition, the petitioners, inter-alia, seek a direction to respondents to accord the benefit Kramonnati under the time bound promotion scheme in the light of the law laid down in the case of K.L.Asre Vs. State of M.P. And Others passed in n W.P.No.1070/2003(S) decided on 07.11.2005 and State of M.P. and Others Vs. Tejulal Yadav. Passed in W.A.No.966/2009 decided on 27.10.2009].

When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the controversy involved in the instant writ petition is squarely covered by an order dated 7.11.2015 passed in W.P.No.1070/2003 (S).

In view of aforesaid submission and with a view to maintain parity, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the case of the petitioners shall be examined by the respondent authority in the light of the judgment delivered by this Court in the case of W.P.(S) No.1070/2003 K.L.Asre Vs. State of M.P. & Another decided on 07.11.2005 and as per order dated 05.03.2013 passed in W.A.No.630/2010 by the Division Bench of this Court in the light of the direction issued in the said case. If petitioners' case is found similar then the benefit will be extended within a period of six months from the date of communication of this order. It is to be observed here that if the case of the petitioner is not found similar, after affording an opportunity of hearing reasoned order be passed within the time as specified. Needless to observe, if petitioner feels aggrieved by the fresh order then he is at liberty to take recourse of law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. C.C. as per rules.

(ALOK ARADHE) JUDGE