W.P. No.11113/2014 (Smt. <NAME> vs. State of M.P. & Ors.) 31.07.2014 <NAME>, Advocate for the petitioner. <NAME>, Panel Lawyer for respondents-

State on advance copy.

Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a direction to respondent no.1 to consider and decide her representation/appeal dated 10.05.2014 against order dated 26.04.2014 cancelling her appointment dated 19.09.2012 made on the post of <ORG> on compassionate ground.

Counsel for the respondents-State submits that the representation/appeal of the petitioner shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

In view of the limited prayer made by the Counsel for petitioner, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the respondents-authorities to consider and decide the representation/appeal of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of submission of certified copy of this order alongwith copy of petition.

However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authority would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the representation/appeal by passing a reasoned order.

With the aforesaid observation, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

(R.S.Jha) Judge SS


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR <NAME> AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR S.B.CIVIL MISC. STAY APPLL. NO. 6039/1999 in SB CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1431/1999 Date of order ::17/09/2013 HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE <NAME> Mr.<NAME>, for the appellant/s. Mr.<NAME> & Mr.<NAME>, for the respondents.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

It appears that the appeal has been preferred by the appellant/non-petitioners without complying with the third proviso to Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act , namely without furnishing the certificate of the Commissioner to the effect that the appellant had deposited the amount payable under the Order passed by the Commissioner against the appellant.

It also appears that vide order dated 30.9.1999, interim order was passed by this Court, and same has been continued till this date.

Having regard to the facts & circumstances of the case, and since the appeal has been admitted today itself on the substantial questions of law, the said order dated 30.9.1999 is continued till the pendency of the appeal on the condition that the appellant shall deposit the amount of penalty imposed by the Commissioner within a period of two weeks before the Commissioner. The amount which may be deposited by the appellant, may be withdrawn by the respondent-claimants on furnishing solvent security before the Commissioner.

The stay application stands disposed of.

(<NAME>) J.

sandeep/-2 All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order for emailed.

<NAME> PA-cum-JW