Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 65 (0.42 seconds)
Documents citing Tulsiram Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Judgement ... on 7 October, 2013

Shrikant Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 March, 2022

It is submitted that petitioner specifically have taken a ground in para 6.3 of the writ petition that he is still posted at Gram Panchayat Barhotola and has not been relieved and no body joined in his place.Subject to such declaration, it is directed that if petitioner is still posted at Gram Panchayat Barhotola, not being relieved, nobody joined in his place of the petitioner as on today then the impugned order of transfer will not be given effect to in terms of the directions of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A No. 64/2022 (Tulsiram Patel Vs. State of M.P & others) decided on 28/01/2022.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Gopal Singh Dhurve vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 February, 2022

Accordingly, in terms of the order dated 28.1.2022 passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.64/2022 (Tulsiram Patel versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Others), the impugned transfer order of the petitioner is quashed subject to the condition that if the petitioner after relieving has not yet submitted his jointing at the transferred place then he will not be required to carry out the transfer & work at the transferred place. If the petitioner has yet not joined at the transferred place then the authorities will be free to deal with the intervening period, after relieving of the petitioner, in terms of the provisions as are contained in the relevant service rules.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Vinod Kumar Nayak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 February, 2022

Accordingly, in terms of the order dated 28.1.2022 passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.64/2022 (Tulsiram Patel versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Others), the impugned transfer order of the petitioner is quashed subject to the condition that if the petitioner after relieving has not yet submitted his joining at the transferred place then he will not be required to carry out the transfer & work at the transferred place. If the petitioner has yet not joined at the transferred place then the authorities will be free to deal with the intervening period, after relieving of the petitioner, in terms of the provisions as are contained in the relevant service rules.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Shivnarayan Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 February, 2022

Accordingly, in terms of the order dated 28.1.2022 passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.64/2022 (Tulsiram Patel versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Others), the impugned transfer orders of the petitioner is quashed subject to the condition that if the petitioner after relieving has not yet submitted his joining at the transferred place then he will not be required to carry out the transfer & work at the transferred place. If the petitioner has yet not joined at the transferred place then the authorities will be free to deal with the intervening period, after relieving of the petitioner, in terms of the provisions as are contained in the relevant service rules.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Sheikh Jahid Qureshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 February, 2022

Accordingly, in terms of the order dated 28.1.2022 passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.64/2022 (Tulsiram Patel versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Others), the impugned transfer order of the petitioner is quashed subject to the condition that if the petitioner after relieving has not yet submitted his jointing at the transferred place then he will not be required to carry out the transfer & work at the transferred place. If the petitioner has yet not joined at the transferred place then the authorities will be free to deal with the intervening period, after relieving of the petitioner, in terms of the provisions as are contained in the relevant service rules.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Upendra Singh Baghel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 February, 2022

Accordingly, in terms of the order dated 28.1.2022 passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.64/2022 (Tulsiram Patel versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Others), the impugned transfer order of the petitioner is quashed subject to the condition that if the petitioner after relieving has not yet submitted his jointing at the transferred place then he will not be required to carry out the transfer & work at the transferred place. If the petitioner has yet not joined at the transferred place then the authorities will be free to deal with the intervening period, after relieving of the petitioner, in terms of the provisions as are contained in the relevant service rules.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Chandrika Prasad Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 February, 2022

Accordingly, in terms of the order dated 28.1.2022 passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.64/2022 (Tulsiram Patel versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Others), the impugned transfer order of the petitioner is quashed subject to the condition that if the petitioner after relieving has not yet submitted his jointing at the transferred place then he will not be required to carry out the transfer & work at the transferred place. If the petitioner has yet not joined at the transferred place then the authorities will be free to deal with the intervening period, after relieving of the petitioner, in terms of the provisions as are contained in the relevant service rules.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Mangal Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 February, 2022

Accordingly, in terms of the order dated 28.1.2022 passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.64/2022 (Tulsiram Patel versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Others), the impugned transfer order of the petitioner is quashed subject to the condition that if the petitioner after relieving has not yet submitted his jointing at the transferred place then he will not be required to carry out the transfer & work at the transferred place. If the petitioner has yet not joined at the transferred place then the authorities will be free to deal with the intervening period, after relieving of the petitioner, in terms of the provisions as are contained in the relevant service rules.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Rajan Prasad Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 March, 2022

Accordingly, in terms of the order dated 28.1.2022 passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.64/2022 (Tulsiram Patel versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Others), the impugned transfer orders of the petitioner is quashed subject to the condition that if the petitioner after relieving has not yet submitted his joining at the transferred place then he will not be required to carry out the transfer & work at the transferred place. If the petitioner has yet not joined at the transferred place then the authorities will be free to deal with the intervening period, after relieving of the petitioner, in terms of the provisions as are contained in the relevant service rules.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - V Agarwal - Full Document

Rajesh Kumar Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 March, 2022

Accordingly, in terms of the order dated 28.1.2022 passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.64/2022 (Tulsiram Patel versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Others), the impugned transfer order dated 28.12.2021 as regards the petitioner is quashed subject to the condition that if the petitioner after relieving has not yet submitted his jointing at the transferred place then he will not be required to carry out the transfer & work at the transferred place. If the petitioner has yet not joined at the transferred place then the authorities will be free to deal with the intervening period, after relieving of the petitioner, in terms of the provisions as are contained in the relevant service rules.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - V Agarwal - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next