Chhattisgarh High Court
WP/5877/2000 of GHANSHYAM DEWANGAN and ORS. Vs STATE OF M.P. and ORS. on 11 December 2001
COURT OF JUDICA'IERE AT JABALPUR (M.P_._l WRIT pmxmow No.5 g”) a1 OF 2000. . PETxTION UNDER 233333235 226/227 OF pcwgmumor: OF INDIA. P ETITIO NERS . . 1. GHANSWAM DEVANEAN, Son of Bismw, aged 35 years, o.B.C. R/o yatan, Districtmm ‘ DURG. 2., SMT. Kz‘NTI DE‘VANGAN, wife
I‘N THEHIGH COURT OFJUDICA'IEREAT JABALPUR(M.P_._la1WRIT pmxmow No.5 g”)OF2000.
. PETxTION UNDER 233333235226/227 OF pcwgmumor: OFINDIA.
P ETIT IO NERS. .1.GHANS WAM DEVA NEAN,
Son of Bismw,aged35years,o.B.C.R/oyatan,District mm‘ DURG.
2.,SMT.Kz‘NTIDE‘VANGAN,
wife ofchaganl a1Devargan,
agemyears,O.B.C.Resident of
Pa tan,Di st rictHIRG.
LalKunwarSi ngh Sori,
son m: B.s.sor'i,égé 3g yearss,Regident of FatanDiStriCtDURG .
VE RSUS
RE@ONDENJ3S
..1.STATEOF MADHYA P‘RADE‘SH THROUGHSecretary,Department: of[Reveme,]/Vallabh Bhawan,BHOPAL.
COLLEC'IC RDURG:
ms trict mrg,M.P.
3.TAHsJLDAR PATAN,
DistrictBurg},M9.
MANAGER,mna Bank,Branch patan,Districtmrg,M.9.
4.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Egkimlars
of__t_:_1_‘1g Eetitionexs.
Asgiven[in]thecause title above.
2. ggrticulars[of]
theReSpondenE.
Asgiven[in]thecauseti tle
above.
Oontcl. 2.
Wm
m
WWQHWET)
loanin +ime.The main confenion made before This Cour? ié fhd‘f a‘r fherelevan‘r fime when no‘rices wr'e issued, The Tahsildar’ concerned had nosuchjurisdicfionToissuesuno‘l'icesforrecovery under TheAc‘r asR.R.CJ£nasmuch[as]+he[said]rime Minisfer Rojgar Vojna did nof come'rhewifhinsaid Adhiniyam1987.I‘i’ may be sfafedpurview[o‘f’fhe][ afo]‘13j'h4Thaibyanamendinenf effe Ted in2000videno‘l'ifica'rionda‘i'edSepTember, 2000, Thesaid P RY has beenincludedwiThin The purviewof The aforesaid ActIf is mnTionedin clause IV of The noTificaTion asfoliowsz-“LPRIME MINISTER ROJGAR VOJNA (PMRV)'haTShri P.P.$ahu, submi‘rs 1 clearly This scheme was noT wiThin TheV'ofTheaforesaidAcibeforeThe amendmenT was effecTedinpurview’2000.IT hasbeenurgedb‘YSlmP-s-Koshy,aswellasShriRajeeii‘ShrivasTai/afha'r Thoughfhisscheme has beenclearlyspecifiedin Theamendmen‘f'suchwasoTherwisesTipulaTedassociallyprogrammedesirable scheme.‘rheAfierhearingsub!nissionsof TheparTies,[I][ am][ of The][ view]'1'ha1'since amendmen‘i' ofTheaforesaid Adhiniyam%ifiedin The yearOW2000 as specifically menfionecThe scheme under whichloan was given To\'The wriT noTices issued The cominginTo peTiTioner;(/ @nxmy vihw prior ToforceofTheamendmenTcar noT besaidTohavebeenvalidlyissued.FacTsremainingThesame,IamofTheGRPRJ—FF5/3ll1/200150,000.
2mm m