{"id":107530,"date":"2002-02-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-02-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002"},"modified":"2015-07-16T05:32:33","modified_gmt":"2015-07-16T00:02:33","slug":"lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002","title":{"rendered":"Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Delhi High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 2002 IIAD Delhi 947<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A Sikri<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S Sinha, A Sikri<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>A.K. Sikri, J. <\/p>\n<p> 1.          The  petitioner feels aggrieved by Order dated<br \/>\n           28.3.1995  as  per which the respondents have raised  a<br \/>\n           demand  of  Rs.1,57,665\/-  against   him.   Since   the<br \/>\n           petitioner   had   taken   voluntary  retirement,   the<br \/>\n           aforesaid  amount  is  sought to be deducted  from  his<br \/>\n           pension.   The petitioner, therefore, seeks quashing of<br \/>\n           the  aforesaid order dated 28.3.1995 and also prays for<br \/>\n           writ  of mandamus directing the respondents not to give<br \/>\n           effect  to  the impugned order and make any  deductions<br \/>\n           from his pension which is payable to the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p> 2.                     In  order  to appreciate the  controversy,  it<br \/>\n           would be appropriate to state the factual matrix.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. CWP.No.1825\/95:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                       The  petitioner  is a Doctor who joined  Armed<br \/>\n           Forces in August,1971 and awarded regular commission as<br \/>\n           a  short service office in May,1972.  At the time  when<br \/>\n           he  joined Armed Forces he was a final year student  of<br \/>\n           M.B.B.S.  He completed his internship in February,1973.<br \/>\n           During  his service he was detailed on various postings<br \/>\n           by the Army and it may not be necessary to give details<br \/>\n           thereof.   However, what is important to notice is that<br \/>\n           the  petitioner  did  his M.D.  course and  obtained  a<br \/>\n           degree  in Nuclear Medicine in August,1989.  Thereafter<br \/>\n           he applied for classification on 16.2.1989 in radiation<br \/>\n           medicine.   His  case was, however, rejected.   He  was<br \/>\n           granted  study  leave for obtaining the  Post  Graduate<br \/>\n           Degree  in  Nuclear  Medicine.  It is  alleged  by  the<br \/>\n           petitioner  that due to the action of the respondent in<br \/>\n           not   giving  the  classification,   he  submitted   an<br \/>\n           application  for  pre-mature retirement  on  30.9.1992.<br \/>\n           After  he  submitted this application, by  order  dated<br \/>\n           15.10.1992  he was transferred to Administrative  Cadre<br \/>\n           with  immediate effect.  Prior thereto he was posted at<br \/>\n           Command  Hospital  (Northern Command) C\/o 56  APO.   By<br \/>\n           order  dated  12.1.1995 his application  for  premature<br \/>\n           retirement  was  approved.   On  the day  when  he  was<br \/>\n           retiring he was given an order dated 28.3.1995 by which<br \/>\n           respondent  No.4 demanded a sum of Rs.1,57,665\/-.  This<br \/>\n           demand was raised on the ground that the petitioner did<br \/>\n           not serve for 7 years after his return from study leave<br \/>\n           as  per the Army Instructions (AI) and his  undertaking<br \/>\n           and  therefore  became liable for refund of the  amount<br \/>\n           received during study leave period.  Feeling aggrieved,<br \/>\n           he has filed the present writ petition.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p> 4.                    In   the   counter-affidavit   filed  by   the<br \/>\n           respondents,  it is explained that Armed Forces Medical<br \/>\n           Services  comprises of two streams of officers, one  of<br \/>\n           Medical  Officers  with  or without any  Post  Graduate<br \/>\n           Qualifications  and  the other of  Specialist  Officers<br \/>\n           having  Post  Graduate Qualifications and appointed  as<br \/>\n           Specialist  Officers.   The   Specialist  Officers  are<br \/>\n           appointed as Graded Specialists, Classified Specialists<br \/>\n           or  as Senior Advisers\/Consultants depending upon their<br \/>\n           educational  qualifications, length of service, service<br \/>\n           seniority  and  on  being  recommended  by  the  Senior<br \/>\n           Adviser   of   the     concerned   speciality.    These<br \/>\n           appointments  are governed by the Training, Grading and<br \/>\n           Classification    Rules   (TGC     Rules)   which   are<br \/>\n           revised\/updated  from  time to time depending upon  the<br \/>\n           Service requirements.  While so appointed as Specialist<br \/>\n           Officers, they are entitled to Specialist Pay.  Further<br \/>\n           it  is  explained  that the  petitioner,  after  having<br \/>\n           fulfillled  the  eligibility  criteria laid  down,  was<br \/>\n           appointed  as a Graded Specialist in Radiation Medicine<br \/>\n           with  effect  from  8th   April,1982.   Therefore,  the<br \/>\n           petitioner was appointed as Graded Specialist only.  To<br \/>\n           become  eligible  for next appointment as a  Classified<br \/>\n           Specialist  the  petitioner  was   required  to  fulfill<br \/>\n           following  various conditions as per the TGC Rules,1979<br \/>\n           then in force:\n<\/p>\n<p>                     (a)  Should have been a Graded Specialist  for<br \/>\n           five years.\n<\/p>\n<p>                     (b)  Should  have  acquired  a  Post  Graduate<br \/>\n           Degree  within the period of five years since the  date<br \/>\n           of Grading (Para 15 of TGC Rules 1979).\n<\/p>\n<p>                     (c)  Must have been recommended by the  Senior<br \/>\n           Adviser.\n<\/p>\n<p> 5.                    The  petitioner applied for study leave to  do<br \/>\n           Post  Graduate Degree which was granted to him.  It  is<br \/>\n           stated in the counter-affidavit that the study leave is<br \/>\n           granted to officers of the Army Medical Corps under the<br \/>\n           provisions  of Army Instructions 13\/78 as amended  from<br \/>\n           time   to   time.   Under   the  provisions   of   Army<br \/>\n           Instructions,  all  officers  are required to  give  an<br \/>\n           undertaking  to  serve  for a minimum period  of  seven<br \/>\n           years from the date of return from study leave.  Should<br \/>\n           an  officer put up for premature retirement\/resignation<br \/>\n           and  if  the same is accepted by the Government  before<br \/>\n           the  completion  of  seven   years,  the  officers  are<br \/>\n           required to refund all pay and allowances drawn by them<br \/>\n           from  whatever source during the period of study leave.<br \/>\n           There is no provision for partial recovery.  In support<br \/>\n           of   this  plea,  the   respondents  have  filed   Army<br \/>\n           Instructions  13\/78.   It  is also clarified  that  the<br \/>\n           petitioner  was  not  given   category  of   Classified<br \/>\n           Specialist  as  he was not able to comply with the  TGC<br \/>\n           Rules,1979.   On  the other hand as the petitioner  did<br \/>\n           not  serve  for a minimum period of 7 years  after  the<br \/>\n           study  leave,  in terms of Army Instructions 13\/78  and<br \/>\n           the  undertaking  given  by him, the  recovery  of  the<br \/>\n           amount  in question has been made which represents  the<br \/>\n           pay  and  allowances received by the petitioner  during<br \/>\n           the study leave period as he had signed an agreement to<br \/>\n           this  effect  just  prior to  proceeding  on  premature<br \/>\n           retirement.\n<\/p>\n<p> 6.                    The  submission  of  learned counsel  for  the<br \/>\n           petitioner  was  that the petitioner was granted  study<br \/>\n           leave  for  acquiring  Post Graduate  qualification  to<br \/>\n           enable  him  to get category of classified  specialist.<br \/>\n           Therefore,  it  was incumbent upon the  respondents  to<br \/>\n           classify  him  as  such.   Had   he  been  given   this<br \/>\n           classification  then as a specialist he was required to<br \/>\n           serve only for 5 years and not 7 years after the expiry<br \/>\n           of  study  leave and as he had served for 5  years,  no<br \/>\n           such recovery could be made.\n<\/p>\n<p> 7.                    This  contention of the petitioner is  totally<br \/>\n           misconceived.   The  petitioner had made a request  for<br \/>\n           appointing  him as Classified Specialist which  request<br \/>\n           was  specifically turned down by order dated  27.3.1990<br \/>\n           on   the   ground  that  he   was  not   eligible   for<br \/>\n           classification  in radiation medicine as per TGC Rules.<br \/>\n           The petitioner had made another request dated 30.4.1990<br \/>\n           which  was  also  turned down  by  communication  dated<br \/>\n           27.12.1990.   The  petitioner  never  challenged  these<br \/>\n           rejections.   As  a result thereof he  remained  Graded<br \/>\n           Specialist  only.   In  fact when  the  petitioner  was<br \/>\n           posted  in  Administrative  Cadre   vide  order   dated<br \/>\n           15.10.1992  he did not challenge even this order.  Thus<br \/>\n           insofar as the respondents are concerned the petitioner<br \/>\n           did   not   belong  to   the  category  of   Classified<br \/>\n           Specialist.   The  orders  of the respondents  to  this<br \/>\n           effect passed in relation to petitioner&#8217;s case remained<br \/>\n           unchallenged  by  the  petitioner   and  thus  attained<br \/>\n           finality.    The  petitioner  retired   as   a   Graded<br \/>\n           Specialist  and not Classified Specialist.   Therefore,<br \/>\n           when  the recovery is sought to be made on that ground,<br \/>\n           at this distance of time while challenging the recovery<br \/>\n           the  petitioner  cannot be permitted to urge  that  his<br \/>\n           case should have been treated as Classified Specialist.<br \/>\n           Consequently,  the petitioner cannot be allowed to urge<br \/>\n           that  he  was required to serve only for 5 years  after<br \/>\n           the  study  leave  which  is required in  the  case  of<br \/>\n           Classified  Specialist  as  in the  category  to  which<br \/>\n           petitioner  belonged  the requirement is 7 years.   The<br \/>\n           petitioner  admittedly having not completed that period<br \/>\n           and  took  premature retirement, the  respondents  were<br \/>\n           well  within  their right to effect the  recovery.   No<br \/>\n           other  contention  was raised.  This petition which  is<br \/>\n           devoid of any merit is accordingly dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Delhi High Court Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002 Equivalent citations: 2002 IIAD Delhi 947 Author: A Sikri Bench: S Sinha, A Sikri JUDGMENT A.K. Sikri, J. 1. The petitioner feels aggrieved by Order dated 28.3.1995 as per which the respondents have raised a demand [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-107530","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2002-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-07-16T00:02:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-16T00:02:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002\"},\"wordCount\":1231,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002\",\"name\":\"Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-16T00:02:33+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-07-16T00:02:33+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002","datePublished":"2002-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-16T00:02:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002"},"wordCount":1231,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002","name":"Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-16T00:02:33+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lt-col-y-n-i-anand-retd-vs-union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-on-6-february-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Lt. Col. Y.N.I. Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 6 February, 2002"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/107530","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=107530"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/107530\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=107530"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=107530"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=107530"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}