Anuruddha Kumar Pandey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 15469 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Anuruddha Kumar Pandey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 May, 2024

Author: Chief Justice

Bench: Ravi Malimath, Vishal Mishra

                                1
 IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                     AT JABALPUR
                          BEFORE
            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,
                       CHIEF JUSTICE
                             &
            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
                      ON THE 22 nd OF MAY, 2024
                  WRIT PETITION No. 14412 of 2024

BETWEEN:-
ANURUDDHA KUMAR PANDEY S/O RAM INDRA
PANDEY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
RETIRED HEAD CONSTABLE POLICE R/O POLICE LINE
JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                            .....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ASEEM DIXIT - ADVOCATE)

AND
1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL
      SECRETARY MANTRALAYA, VALLABH BHAWAN,
      BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.    SUPERINTENDENT      OF  POLICE, JABALPUR
      DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.    DIVISIONAL        PENSION       OFFICER,
      DIVISIONAL/DISTRICT    PENSION     OFFICE
      DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                         .....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI S.S. CHAUHAN - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

      This petition coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravi
Malimath, Chief Justice passed the following:
                                 ORDER

Learned counsels for the parties submit that the question of law that arises for consideration in this petition is covered by the judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 8219 of 2020 (Madhya Pradesh Power Transmission Company Limited and another vs. S.R. Ramchandran & others) dated 11.07.2023. Hence, they plead that this petition be also disposed off on the same terms.

In view of the submission made, the petition is disposed off in terms of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

However, it is noticed that there are various defaults as pointed out by the Registry including non-payment of deficit court fees. In the larger interest of justice, the defaults except court fee are overruled.

T he petitioner to submit the deficit Court fees, as demanded by the

Registry. Only after the deficit court fees has been paid, the certified copy be issued and the order will be uploaded and not until then.

                                    (RAVI MALIMATH)                                        (VISHAL MISHRA)
                                      CHIEF JUSTICE                                             JUDGE
                           SKM




Date: 2024.05.31 15:33:20 +05'30'