Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 73 (0.57 seconds)

Smt. Kranti Burman vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 November, 2022

It is also contended by the counsel that the Division Bench of this Court in WA No.378/2018 ( Balkrishna Rathi Vs. State of M.P. and others) has held that an employee cannot be prevented from performing her duties and the employer under the garb of principle of "No work no Pay" cannot be permitted to withhold the salary and emoluments of the concerned employee. The counsel thus, submits that the respondents be directed to the pay salary to the petitioner and Signature Not Verified Signed by: PARMESHWAR GOPE Signing time: 12/2/2022 12:29:04 PM 6 petitioner be permitted to join her duties.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - M S Bhatti - Full Document

Smt. Kranti Burman vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 November, 2022

It is also contended by the counsel that the Division Bench of this Court in WA No.378/2018 ( Balkrishna Rathi Vs. State of M.P. and others) has held that an employee cannot be prevented from performing her duties and the employer under the garb of principle of "No work no Pay" cannot be permitted to withhold the salary and emoluments of the concerned employee. The counsel thus, submits that the respondents be directed to the pay salary to the petitioner and Signature Not Verified Signed by: PARMESHWAR GOPE Signing time: 12/2/2022 12:29:04 PM 6 petitioner be permitted to join her duties.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - M S Bhatti - Full Document

Dr. Satya Prakash Gupta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 December, 2021

The prayer is opposed by Shri Akshay Pawar, by contending that since petitioner has not performed his duties, 2 the question of granting him pay and allowances does not arise. However, he did not point out anything which otherwise makes the case of present petitioner distinguishable qua the case of Balkrishna Rathi (supra) decided by Division Bench. The Division Bench in Balkrishna Rathi opined as under :-
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 10 - S Paul - Full Document

Dr. (Ms) Saroj Potdar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 April, 2024

Moreover a coordinate Division Bench in Balkrish Rathi vs. State of M.P. and others [R.P. No.265/2021 decided on 05.08.2021] has condoned delay of 221 days. When the appellant came to know about similar orders passed by coordinate Division Benches of this Court, she immediately contacted her counsel who applied for the certified copy of impugned order on 12.04.2022 and has thereafter immediately preferred the instant appeal. It is hence submitted that there are sufficient reasons by which the appellant was prevented from preferring the appeal within time hence the delay in filing the appeal deserves to be condoned.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - S A Dharmadhikari - Full Document

Hari Mohan Pandey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 January, 2026

20. By placing reliance on the aforesaid judgment, the Division Bench of this Court allowed various writ appeals of similarly placed professors in the matter of Balkrishan Rathi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others [(2021) SCC OnLine MP 3778]. The aforesaid order was challenged before Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 05-02- 2026 18:09:45 16 WA-2341-2024 the Apex Court by the State of M.P., vide order dated 08.04.2022, and the said SLP has been dismissed.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - V Rusia - Full Document

Kayum Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 January, 2026

20. By placing reliance on the aforesaid judgment, the Division Bench of this Court allowed various writ appeals of similarly placed professors in the matter of Balkrishan Rathi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others [(2021) SCC OnLine MP 3778]. The aforesaid order was challenged before Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 05-02- 2026 18:09:45 16 WA-2340-2024 the Apex Court by the State of M.P., vide order dated 08.04.2022, and the said SLP has been dismissed.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - V Rusia - Full Document

Kishan Lal Rajak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 January, 2026

20. By placing reliance on the aforesaid judgment, the Division Bench of this Court allowed various writ appeals of similarly placed professors in the matter of Balkrishan Rathi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others [(2021) SCC OnLine MP 3778]. The aforesaid order was challenged before Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 05-02- 2026 18:09:45 16 WA-197-2025 the Apex Court by the State of M.P., vide order dated 08.04.2022, and the said SLP has been dismissed.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - V Rusia - Full Document

Balram Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 January, 2026

20. By placing reliance on the aforesaid judgment, the Division Bench of this Court allowed various writ appeals of similarly placed professors in the matter of Balkrishan Rathi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others [(2021) SCC OnLine MP 3778]. The aforesaid order was challenged before Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 05-02- 2026 18:09:45 16 WA-2339-2024 the Apex Court by the State of M.P., vide order dated 08.04.2022, and the said SLP has been dismissed.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - V Rusia - Full Document

Babu Lal Barar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 January, 2026

20. By placing reliance on the aforesaid judgment, the Division Bench of this Court allowed various writ appeals of similarly placed professors in the matter of Balkrishan Rathi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others [(2021) SCC OnLine MP 3778]. The aforesaid order was challenged before Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHRUTI JHA Signing time: 05-02- 2026 18:09:45 16 WA-2338-2024 the Apex Court by the State of M.P., vide order dated 08.04.2022, and the said SLP has been dismissed.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - V Rusia - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next