{"id":120054,"date":"2009-11-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009"},"modified":"2018-06-29T17:18:05","modified_gmt":"2018-06-29T11:48:05","slug":"chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI.\n                       W.P.(S). No. 5514 of 2004\n                                    ...\n             Chandra Dhan Ram                                    ...   Petitioner\n                                    -V e r s u s-\n              1. The State of Jharkhand\n              2. Secretary, Rural Development Department, Jharkhand\n              3. Chief Engineer, Rural Engineering Organization,\n                 Chhotanagpur Wing, Ranchi\n              4. Superintending Engineer, Rural Engineering\n                 Organization, Works Circle, Ranchi\n              5. Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Organization,\n                 Works Division, Chaibasa, Singbhum West         ...   Respondents\n                                            ...\nCORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.G.R. PATNAIK.\n                                            ...\n              For the Petitioner    : - Mr. A.K.Sahani, Advocate\n              For the Respondents : - J.C. to S.C.-III.\n                                            ...\n03\/ 27.11.2009<\/pre>\n<p>        Heard counsel for the parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>             2.      The petitioner in this writ application has prayed for a direction upon the<br \/>\n             respondents to regularize the petitioner&#8217;s service and to pay him the arrears of<br \/>\n             salary claimed by him from March, 1996 till date.\n<\/p>\n<p>             3.      The admitted facts of the petitioner&#8217;s case is that he was engaged as a daily<br \/>\n             wage worker in the Rural Engineering Organization, Works Division under the<br \/>\n             State Government. Earlier his appointment was in the concerned department at<br \/>\n             Ranchi and later, his services were engaged in the concerned department at<br \/>\n             Chaibasa. The petitioner&#8217;s contention is that from 01.01.1985 he was engaged on<br \/>\n             Master Roll and he was posted under the Junior Engineer, REO, Ranchi.\n<\/p>\n<p>                     Sometime in the month of May, 1987, he was transferred to Chaibasa in<br \/>\n             the office of Respondent No. 5 namely the Executive Engineer, REO, Works<br \/>\n             Division, Chaibasa. In confirmation of the fact that he had continuously worked<br \/>\n             from 01.01.1985 to 30.04.1987, a certificate was also issued in favour of the<br \/>\n             petitioner by the then Executive Engineer, REO, Ranchi.\n<\/p>\n<p>                     Thereafter, upon his transfer to Chaibasa, his services continued to be<br \/>\n             regularly taken by the respondent authorities on and from 01.05.1987 till the date<br \/>\n             of filing this writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>                     The petitioner&#8217;s further contention is that after March, 1996 he was not<br \/>\n             paid his wages although his services were continued to be taken by the concerned<br \/>\n             authorities of the respondents till date. This fact, accordingly to the learned<br \/>\n             counsel for the petitioner, is confirmed from the letter (Annexure-4) issued by the<br \/>\n             Superintending Engineer to the Executive Engineer calling for an explanation as<br \/>\n             to why despite the fact that the petitioner&#8217;s services were regularly engaged, he<br \/>\n             was not paid the salary from 1996 onwards. Despite such query and directions,<br \/>\n             when no reply was obtained from the Executive Engineer and the several<br \/>\n representations of the petitioner having remained unresponded, the petitioner had<br \/>\npreferred the present writ application.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.      Learned counsel for the petitioner explains that the Supreme Court in one<br \/>\nof such cases, where the issue raised by the daily wage employees regarding their<br \/>\nregularization in service, had directed the State Government to take steps for<br \/>\nregularizing all such daily wage workers who had completed 240 days of service<br \/>\nby 01.08.1985. The petitioner&#8217;s services commencing from 01.01.1985 was<br \/>\ncontinuously taken up to 30.04.1987, as has been acknowledged even by the<br \/>\nrespondents in their counter affidavit. The petitioner, according to the learned<br \/>\ncounsel, is therefore entitled to be regularized in service and also for wages for<br \/>\nthe period during which his services were engaged.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.      A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. The stand<br \/>\ntaken by the respondents is that the services of the petitioner were though engaged<br \/>\nfrom 01.01.1985 but on assessment it was found that he has not completed<br \/>\ncontinuous 240 days of work prior to the cut of date of 01.08.1985 and therefore<br \/>\neven as per the directions contained in the Supreme Court&#8217;s order, the case of the<br \/>\npetitioner could not be considered for his regularization.\n<\/p>\n<p>        It is further explained that though from June, 1987 till October, 1995 the<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s services were continuously engaged, but during all such period his<br \/>\nwages were duly paid to him and from 1996 onwards his services were no more<br \/>\nengaged and infact he was terminated from service.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.      From the annexures to the writ application including Annexure-4, there<br \/>\nappears a contradiction in the statement of the respondents. Whereas the counter<br \/>\naffidavit declares that the petitioner had worked only up to October, 1995 and<br \/>\nthereafter his services were terminated, but from the perusal of Annexure-4 issued<br \/>\nby the Superintending Engineer, it appears that the petitioner&#8217;s services continued<br \/>\nto be taken till the date when the letter was issued i.e. 08.01.2002.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.      Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this aspect of the<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s case has not been controverted by the respondents in their counter<br \/>\naffidavit.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.      Be that as it may, admittedly the petitioner&#8217;s services were engaged on<br \/>\ndaily wage basis. It is a disputed question of fact as to whether the petitioner had<br \/>\ncontinuously worked for 240 days prior to 01.08.1985 and could therefore be<br \/>\neligible for the benefits as contained in the order of the Supreme Court in the<br \/>\nanalogous case. It also appears that though subsequently the petitioner&#8217;s services<br \/>\nwere engaged from June, 1987 and continuously thereafter, there is again a<br \/>\ndisputed question of fact as to whether the services were terminated in the year<br \/>\n1996 or continued to be taken up to 2002. The letter of the Superintending<br \/>\nEngineer appears to lend support to the petitioner&#8217;s claim that his services were<br \/>\ncontinued to be engaged atleast till 2002. This aspect of the matter needs to be<br \/>\n             verified and if it is found that the services of the petitioner were continuously<br \/>\n            engaged since after March, 1996 till 2002, then the petitioner would be certainly<br \/>\n            entitled to the wages for the period and if no such wages were paid to him, he<br \/>\n            would certainly be entitled to claim for the arrears of such wages.\n<\/p>\n<p>                     As regards the petitioner&#8217;s claim for regularization, this Court cannot<br \/>\n            possibly issue any such directions to the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>            9.       In the light of the above discussions, this application is disposed of with<br \/>\n            the following directions:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                     (i)    The Respondent No. 2 shall verify from the records as to whether<br \/>\n                             the services of the petitioner continued to be engaged from March,<br \/>\n                             1996 to January, 2002 and if so, whether any wages were paid to<br \/>\n                             him. If it is found on verification that the petitioner&#8217;s services were<br \/>\n                             engaged and yet his wages were not paid for the aforesaid period,<br \/>\n                             the concerned authorities of the respondents shall ensure the<br \/>\n                             payment of the arrears of such wages for the period the petitioner<br \/>\n                             had   worked,     within    two    months     from    the    date   of<br \/>\n                             receipt\/production of a copy of this order.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                     (ii)   As regards the petitioner&#8217;s claim for regularization, the respondents<br \/>\n                            shall re-consider the petitioner&#8217;s case in the light of the guidelines<br \/>\n                            given by the Supreme Court in S.L.A. \u00a9 No. 18164 of 1999 and<br \/>\n                            analogous cases and in doing so, the petitioner&#8217;s case may be<br \/>\n                            considered by giving him the benefit of relaxation of age, if he so<br \/>\n                            deserves.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                     With these observations, this writ application is disposed of.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>                     Let a copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for the respondent<br \/>\n            State.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                                         (D.G.R. Patnaik, J.)<br \/>\nBirendra\/\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P.(S). No. 5514 of 2004 &#8230; Chandra Dhan Ram &#8230; Petitioner -V e r s u s- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Secretary, Rural Development Department, Jharkhand 3. Chief Engineer, [&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":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-120054","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009 - 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\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-11-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-29T11:48:05+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\\\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-29T11:48:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1065,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-29T11:48:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009 - 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\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-29T11:48:05+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\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-29T11:48:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009"},"wordCount":1065,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009","name":"Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-29T11:48:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandra-dhan-ram-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-27-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chandra Dhan Ram vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 27 November, 2009"}]},{"@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\/120054","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=120054"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/120054\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=120054"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=120054"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=120054"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}