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 0, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Suresh Kumar Dwivedi vs State Of Madhay Pradesh on 9 August, 2019

                                                          1                                WP-10693-2019
                                  The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                             WP-10693-2019
                                       (SURESH KUMAR DWIVEDI Vs STATE OF MADHAY PRADESH)

                      4
                      Jabalpur, Dated : 09-08-2019
                              Mr. U.K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
                              Ms. Ankita Khare, learned counsel for the State.
                              Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an application bearing
                      I.A. No.9377/2019 has been filed by the petitioner for modification of the
                      order dated 22.07.2019.

                              Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while passing the
                      aforesaid order, this Court has held that as the recovery order against the
                      petitioner has been withdrawn by the respondent on 14.05.2019, there is no

necessity to pass such an order that no coercive action will be taken against the petitioner hence the petitioner seeks modification of the said order as the petitioner has filed the writ petition against the impugned order whereby the respondent No.3 directed the concerned authority to ensure the recovery of excess payment made to the petitioner and if the said order is not modified, the petitioner would suffer an irreparable injury.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the identical petition i.e in W.P. No.11981/2019 this Court has passed an order no coercive action will be taken against the petitioner in the present case similar order was passed.

Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer of the petitioner but does not dispute that in the other connected petitions the order of the interim order has been passed.

Application for modification is allowed and the order dated 22.07.2019 is hereby modified with a direction that the words "as the order withdrawn there is no necessity to pass an order that no coercive action will be taken against the petitioner" shall be read as "no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner".

Digitally signed by JULIE SINGH Date: 14/08/2019 10:58:36

2 WP-10693-2019 Accordingly, I.A. stands disposed of.

List the matter for final disposal at motion hearing stage immediately after four weeks.

(SUBODH ABHYANKAR) JUDGE julie Digitally signed by JULIE SINGH Date: 14/08/2019 10:58:36