Madhya Pradesh High Court
Maya Panwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 March, 2018
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
WP-1188-2018
(MAYA PANWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
3
Jabalpur, Dated : 15-03-2018
Mrs. Shano Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Shivendra Pandey, learned Govt. Advocate for the
State/respondents No.1 to 4.
sh Counsel for the State again prays for time and submits that e through telephonic communication he has been informed that the case ad of the petitioner, who is a victim of acid attack, for payment of Pr compensation, is under consideration. On the earlier date of hearing this Court had granted last opportunity to the State to file reply with a hy the direction that in case reply is not filed on or before the next date of hearing, the Collector, Sehore (respondent No.3) shall remain ad personally present before this Court.
M Counsel for the State submits that before the next date of listing, all endeavours shall be made to make the payment of compensation to of the petitioner, after examining her case in the light of the directives rt issued by the Apex Court in the case of Laxmi vs. Union of India, ou (2014) 4 SCC 427.
Considering the statement of the learned counsel appearing for C the State, hearing of the matter is fixed to 9-4-2018. h It is hereby made clear, if on or before the date fixed, ig compensation is not paid to the petitioner, the Collector, Sehore and H Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Sehore respondent Nos.3 and 4 respectively, shall remain personally present before this Court. This Court hopes and trusts that the order will be complied with by the respondents in stricto sensu.
Let a copy of this order be supplied to the counsel for the State to ensure compliance.
List on the date fixed.
VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
Digitally signed by AJAY
JUDGE
KUMAR CHATURVEDI
Date: 2018.03.15 18:39:49
+05'30'
H
ig ac
h
C
ou
rt
of
M
ad
hy
a
Pr
ad
e sh