{"id":10857,"date":"2008-11-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008"},"modified":"2018-12-20T13:09:36","modified_gmt":"2018-12-20T07:39:36","slug":"the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C &#8230; vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C &#8230; vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n\n                             CHANDIGARH.\n\n\n                                                  C.W.P. No.5946 of 2008\n                                              Date of decision: 10.11.2008\n\nThe Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C Society Ltd.\n                                                             -----Petitioner\n                                    Vs.\nState of Punjab and others.\n                                                         -----Respondents\n\n\nCORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL\n             HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL\n\nPresent:-    None       for the petitioner.\n\n             Mr. Piyush Kant Jain, Addl.A.G., Punjab.\n                   -----\n\nORDER:\n<\/pre>\n<p>1.           This petition seeks quashing of tender process initiated vide<\/p>\n<p>notices dated 29.2.2008 (Annexures P-2 and P-3).\n<\/p>\n<p>2.           Case of the petitioner is that it is a cooperative society and<\/p>\n<p>as per policy of the State Government notified on 22.12.2004 vide<\/p>\n<p>Annexure P-1, all unskilled works upto any value and skilled works upto<\/p>\n<p>the limit of Rs.15 lacs for each work, should be allotted to cooperative<\/p>\n<p>societies only within the ceiling rates fixed by the Public Works<\/p>\n<p>Department.      Ignoring the said instructions, the impugned tender<\/p>\n<p>notices have been issued, which are open to all.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.           We have heard learned counsel for the State and perused<\/p>\n<p>the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p> C.W.P. No.5946 of 2008<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                        2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>4.          It has not been disputed that the impugned tender notices<\/p>\n<p>are in violation of Government policy as reflected in notification<\/p>\n<p>(Annexure       P-1). No reply has been filed inspite of notices having<\/p>\n<p>been duly served and sufficient period having lapsed.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.          Only justification put forward is that the writ petition seeks<\/p>\n<p>enforcement of a policy, which is not law.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.          Though, mere administrative instructions may not give rise<\/p>\n<p>to enforceable right, no administrative authority can act arbitrarily and<\/p>\n<p>must be rigorously held to the standards by which it profess its actions<\/p>\n<p>to be judged.\n<\/p>\n<p>            <a href=\"\/doc\/414655\/\">In State of Assam      v. Ajit Kumar Sarma AIR<\/a> 1965 SC<\/p>\n<p>1196, it was observed as under:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>            &#8220;12. We may in this connection refer to <a href=\"\/doc\/1510323\/\">M\/s. Raman and<br \/>\n            Raman v. State of Madras,<\/a> (1959) Supp (2) SCR 227 : (AIR<br \/>\n            1959 SC 694) where this Court had to consider certain<br \/>\n            orders and directions issued under S. 43A of the Motor<br \/>\n            Vehicles (Madras Amendment) Act, 1948. The question<br \/>\n            arose whether the orders issued under S. 43A had the<br \/>\n            status of law or not. This Court held that such orders did not<br \/>\n            have the status, of law regulating the rights of parties and<br \/>\n            must partake of the character of administrative orders. It<br \/>\n            was further held that there could be no right arising out of<br \/>\n            mere executive instructions, much less a vested right, and if<br \/>\n            such instructions were changed pending any appeal, there<br \/>\n            would be no change in the law pending the appeal so as to<br \/>\n            affect any vested right of a party. That decision in our<br \/>\n            opinion governs the present case also, for it has been found<br \/>\n            by the High Court, and it is not disputed before us, that the<br \/>\n            Rules are mere administrative instructions and have not the<br \/>\n            force of law as statutory rules. They therefore confer no<br \/>\n C.W.P. No.5946 of 2008<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                         3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>           right on the teachers of private colleges which would entitle<br \/>\n           them to maintain a writ petition under Art. 226 for the<br \/>\n           enforcement or non-enforcement of any provision of the<br \/>\n           Rules. The Rules being mere administrative instructions are<br \/>\n           matters between private colleges and the Government in<br \/>\n           the matter of grant-in-aid to such colleges, and no teacher<br \/>\n           of a college has any right under the Rules to ask either for<br \/>\n           their enforcement or for their non-enforcement. We are<br \/>\n           therefore of opinion that the High Court was in error when it<br \/>\n           granted a writ against the State through the Director, by<br \/>\n           which the Director was asked not to give effect to its letter<br \/>\n           dated March 20, 1962, against the Governing Body of the<br \/>\n           College.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>7.         <a href=\"\/doc\/1281050\/\">In Ramana Dayuaram Shetty v. The International Airport<\/p>\n<p>Authority of India and others<\/a>, AIR 1979 SC 1628, it was observed:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>           &#8220;10. Now, there can be no doubt that what para (1) of the<br \/>\n           notice prescribed was a condition of eligibility which was<br \/>\n           required to be satisfied by every person submitting a tender.<br \/>\n           The condition of eligibility was that the person submitting a<br \/>\n           tender must be conducting or running a registered IInd<br \/>\n           Class hotel or restaurant and he must have at least 5 years&#8217;<br \/>\n           experience as such and if he did not satisfy this condition of<br \/>\n           eligibility, his tender would not be eligible for consideration.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>           This was the standard or norm of eligibility laid down by the<br \/>\n           Ist respondent and since the 4th respondents did not satisfy<br \/>\n           this standard or norm, it was not competent to the Ist<br \/>\n           respondent to entertain the tender of the 4th respondents. It<br \/>\n           is a well settled rule of administrative law that an executive<br \/>\n           authority must be rigorously held to the standards by which<br \/>\n           it professes its actions to be judged and it must<br \/>\n           scrupulously    observe    those    standards    on   pain    of<br \/>\n C.W.P. No.5946 of 2008<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                        4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>          invalidation of an act in violation of them. This rule was<br \/>\n          enunciated by Mr. Justice Frankfurter in Vitarelli v. Seaton<br \/>\n          (1959) 359 US 535 : 3 L Ed 2d 1012 where the learned<br \/>\n          Judge said :\n<\/p>\n<p>          &#8220;An executive agency must be rigorously held to the<br \/>\n          standards by which it professes its action to be judged. &#8230;&#8230;<br \/>\n          Accordingly, if dismissal from employment is based on a<br \/>\n          defined procedure, even though generous beyond the<br \/>\n          requirements that bind such agency, that procedure must<br \/>\n          be scrupulously observed. &#8230;&#8230;.This judicially evolved rule of<br \/>\n          administrative law is now firmly established and, if I may<br \/>\n          add, rightly so. He that takes the procedural sword shall<br \/>\n          perish with the sword.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>          This Court accepted the rule as valid and applicable in India<br \/>\n          in A. S. Ahluwalia v. State of Punjab (1975) 3 SCR 82 : (AIR<br \/>\n          1975 SC 984) and in subsequent decision given in Sukhdev<br \/>\n          v. Bhagatram, (1975) 3 SCR 619 : (AIR 1975 SC 1331),<br \/>\n          Mathew, J., quoted the above-referred observations of Mr.<br \/>\n          Justice Frankfurter with approval. It may be noted that this<br \/>\n          rule, though supportable also as emanating from Article 14,<br \/>\n          does not rest merely on that article. It has an independent<br \/>\n          existence apart from Article 14. It is a rule of administrative<br \/>\n          law which has been judicially evolved as a check against<br \/>\n          exercise of arbitrary power by the executive authority. If we<br \/>\n          turn to the judgment of Mr. Justice Frankfurter and examine<br \/>\n          it, we find that he has not sought to draw support for the<br \/>\n          rule from the equality clause of the United States<br \/>\n          Constitution but evolved it purely as a rule of administrative<br \/>\n          law. Even in England, the recent trend in administrative law<br \/>\n          is in that direction as is evident from what is stated at pages<br \/>\n          540-41 in Prof. Wade&#8217;s Administrative Law 4th Edition.<br \/>\n          There is no reason why we should hesitate to adopt this rule<br \/>\n          as a part of our continually expanding administrative law.<br \/>\n C.W.P. No.5946 of 2008<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                      5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>          Today with tremendous expansion of welfare and social<br \/>\n          service functions increasing control of material and<br \/>\n          economic resources and large scale assumption of<br \/>\n          industrial and commercial activities by the State, the power<br \/>\n          of the executive government to affect the lives of the people<br \/>\n          is steadily growing. The attainment of socio-economic<br \/>\n          justice being a conscious end of State policy, there is a vast<br \/>\n          and inevitable increase in the frequency with which ordinary<br \/>\n          citizens come into relationship of direct encounter with State<br \/>\n          power-holders. This renders it necessary to structure and<br \/>\n          restrict the power of the executive Government so as to<br \/>\n          prevent its arbitrary application or exercise. Whatever be<br \/>\n          the concept of the rule of law, whether it be the meaning<br \/>\n          given by Dicey in his &#8220;The Law of the Constitution&#8221; or the<br \/>\n          definition given by Hayek in his &#8220;Road to Serfdom&#8221; and<br \/>\n          &#8220;Constitution of liberty&#8221; or the exposition set forth by Herry<br \/>\n          Jones in his &#8220;The Rule of Law and the Welfare State&#8221;, there<br \/>\n          is, as pointed out by Mathew, J., in his article on &#8220;The<br \/>\n          Welfare State, Rule of Law and Natural Justice&#8221; in<br \/>\n          Democracy, Equality and Freedom &#8220;substantial agreement<br \/>\n          in juristic thought that the great purpose of the rule of law<br \/>\n          notion is the protection of the individual against arbitrary<br \/>\n          exercise of power, wherever it is found&#8221;. It is indeed<br \/>\n          unthinkable that in a democracy governed by the rule of law<br \/>\n          the executive Government or any of its officers should<br \/>\n          possess arbitrary power over the interests of the individual.<br \/>\n          Every action of the executive Government must be informed<br \/>\n          with reason and should be free from arbitrariness. That is<br \/>\n          the very essence of the rule of law and its bare minimal<br \/>\n          requirement. And to the application of this principle it makes<br \/>\n          no difference whether the exercise of the power involves<br \/>\n          affection of some right or denial of some privilege.&#8221;<br \/>\n C.W.P. No.5946 of 2008<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                      6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>8.         In view of above, in absence of any justification for acting<\/p>\n<p>contrary to declared policy of the state Government, the impugned<\/p>\n<p>notices cannot be sustained.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.         Accordingly, we allow this petition and quash the impugned<\/p>\n<p>tender notices with liberty to the respondents to proceed further in the<\/p>\n<p>matter in accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.         The petition is disposed of.<\/p>\n<pre>\n\n                                          ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL )\n                                                 JUDGE\n\n\nNovember 10, 2008                               ( L. N. MITTAL )\nashwani                                             JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab-Haryana High Court The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C &#8230; vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.5946 of 2008 Date of decision: 10.11.2008 The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C Society Ltd. &#8212;&#8211;Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others. &#8212;&#8211;Respondents CORAM:- [&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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10857","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C ... vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008 - 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\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C ... vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-11-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-20T07:39:36+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C &#8230; vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-20T07:39:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1415,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008\",\"name\":\"The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C ... vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-20T07:39:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C &#8230; vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C ... vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008 - 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\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C ... vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-20T07:39:36+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C &#8230; vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-20T07:39:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008"},"wordCount":1415,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008","name":"The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C ... vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-20T07:39:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-chak-manne-wala-coop-lc-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-10-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Chak Manne Wala Coop. L&amp;C &#8230; vs State Of Punjab And Others on 10 November, 2008"}]},{"@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\/10857","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=10857"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10857\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10857"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10857"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10857"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}