JABALPUR, India, Dec. 26 -- Madhya Pradesh High Court issued the following judgment/order on Nov. 26: 1. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the legality and validity of order dated 27.03.1999 passed by the Commanding Officer, 3 Administrative and Training Regiment and order dated 23.09.2024 passed by Armed Forces Tribunal, by which the order dated 27.03.1999 has been maintained. 2. Heard Shr...
JABALPUR, India, Dec. 26 -- Madhya Pradesh High Court issued the following judgment/order on Nov. 26: The matter was earlier listed on 12.11.2025 and 18.11.2025 and none appeared for petitioner on the first call. Thereafter, the matter did not reach in the subsequent calls. Today also no one appeared for petitioner on first call. The matter is taken up in pass over, none appears for petitioner. It appears that the petitioner does not wish to prosecute the petition any further. The petition i...
JABALPUR, India, Dec. 26 -- Madhya Pradesh High Court issued the following judgment/order on Nov. 26: Learned counsel for petitioners submits that respondent No.3 in all the petitions are present. Respondent No.3 in all the petitions are directed to mark their presence before the Registrar (J) as per rules. Later on Pursuant to our order passed in the morning, respondent no.3 in all the petitions had appeared before the Registrar (Judicial-II) who has noted their presence. Respondent no.3, ...
JABALPUR, India, Dec. 26 -- Madhya Pradesh High Court issued the following judgment/order on Nov. 26: Pursuant to our order passed in the morning, respondent no.3 had appeared before the Registrar (Judicial-II) who has noted his presence. Respondent no.3, is also present in the Court. Petitioner on behalf of respondent no.3 had impugned the validity of order of detention passed by the Collector for detention of said respondent no.3, detenue under Section 3 of the Prevention of Black Marketing...
JABALPUR, India, Dec. 26 -- Madhya Pradesh High Court issued the following judgment/order on Nov. 26: Pursuant to our order passed in the morning, respondent no.3 had appeared before the Registrar (Judicial-II) who has noted his presence. Respondent no.3, is also present in the Court. Petitioner on behalf of respondent no.3 had impugned the validity of order of detention passed by the Collector for detention of said respondent no.3, detenue under Section 3 of the Prevention of Black Marketing...
JABALPUR, India, Dec. 26 -- Madhya Pradesh High Court issued the following judgment/order on Nov. 26: Learned counsel for petitioners submits that respondent No.3 in all the petitions are present. Respondent No.3 in all the petitions are directed to mark their presence before the Registrar (J) as per rules. Later on Pursuant to our order passed in the morning, respondent no.3 in all the petitions had appeared before the Registrar (Judicial-II) who has noted their presence. Respondent no.3, ...
RANCHI, India, Dec. 26 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Nov. 26: 1. After some argument, it was disclosed by the learned counsel for the parties that the impugned order dated 19.06.2024, passed in W.P.(S) No. 1846 of 2023, is subject to two pending review applications, Civil Review No. 124 of 2025, filed by C.C.L., and Civil Review No. 15 of 2025, filed by Anita Devi, who is said to be the first wife of the deceased employee. 2. Mr. Prashant Vidyarthi, learned counsel app...
RANCHI, India, Dec. 26 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Nov. 26: 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 15.10.2025 passed in M.C.A. No. 1834 of 2025 in S.T. No. 69 of 2024 arising out of Sadar (M) P.S. Case No. 281 of 2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh, whereby and whereunder the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected. 2. It has been alleged that there was an exchange of firing between the police personnel and the extremists and ...
RANCHI, India, Dec. 26 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Nov. 26: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has challenged the part of the letter dated 2.8.2019 whereby, grade pay of the petitioner has been reduced to Rs.2400/-. 3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that vide Office Order No. 09 dated 28.01.2020 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition) the pay of the petitioner has been reduced, which could not have been. It is his contention that his g...
RANCHI, India, Dec. 26 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Nov. 26: 1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the instant writ petition be disposed of in terms of W.P.(C) No. 2689 of 2025, as both cases involve the same issue. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure-17) passed by the authority contained in memo no. 456 passed by the respondent no.2 by which the mining leases of the petitioner...