{"id":131388,"date":"2009-11-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009"},"modified":"2015-07-18T00:04:33","modified_gmt":"2015-07-17T18:34:33","slug":"sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam … on 25 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam … on 25 November, 2009<\/div>\n
CWP No.15584 of 2008                                             [1]\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB                    AND HARYANA AT\n                CHANDIGARH.\n\n\n\n                              C. W. P. No. 15584 of 2008\n\n                              Date of Decision: 25 - 11 - 2009\n\n\n\nSube Singh etc.                                      ....Petitioners\n\n\n                              v.\n\nUttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd.                ....Respondents\nand others\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA\n\n                              ***\n\nPresent:   Mr.K.S.Banyana, Advocate\n           for the petitioners.\n\n           Mr.Narender Hooda, Advocate\n           for the respondents.\n\n                             ***\n\nKANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)\n<\/pre>\n
           Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (hereinafter to be<\/p>\n
referred as `UHBVNL’) in the year 2001 intended to construct 33 K.V. Sub<\/p>\n
Station in Village Jhansa.   For the welfare of the residents, the Gram<\/p>\n
Panchayat came forward to provide the necessary land. The land offered by<\/p>\n
the Gram Panchayat was not found suitable for constructing 33 K.V. Sub<\/p>\n
Station, Power Station in Village Jhansa.    Petitioner Sube Singh was<\/p>\n
Sarpanch at that time. He was owner in possession of 1 Acre 5 Kanals and<\/p>\n
10 Marlas of land. His land was found suitable. He offered to give 1 acre<\/p>\n
and 4 Kanals of land to respondent No.1 – UHBVNL and exchanged his
\n CWP No.15584 of 2008                                              [2]<\/p>\n
land in lieu of 3 Kanals and 10 Marlas of land which vested in the Gram<\/p>\n
Panchayat. Petitioners who are father and son had not accepted any money<\/p>\n
from the Gram Panchayat.\n<\/p>\n
             Sum and substance of the case is that for 1 acre and 4 kanals of<\/p>\n
land, petitioners got 3 kanals and 10 marlas of land, therefore, they had to<\/p>\n
forego 1 acre (8 Kanals) of land. It is averred in the writ petition that this<\/p>\n
was done as petitioners were persuaded by the officials of UHBVNL to give<\/p>\n
land on the promise that 24 hours regular power supply to the tube-wells<\/p>\n
situated in the land of the petitioners shall be provided. To fortify the<\/p>\n
averment made that the petitioners had offered the land and in exchange had<\/p>\n
taken less land due to the promise extended that 24 hours regular electric<\/p>\n
power supply will be provided, reliance has been placed on the<\/p>\n
communication addressed by the Executive Engineer, C\/W Division,<\/p>\n
UHBVN, Panchkula. This letter has been attached as Annexure P2. The<\/p>\n
letter read as under:-\n<\/p>\n
             “Subject:   Constn. Of 33 KV S\/stn. at Jhansa.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                         It is submitted that 33 KV S\/Stn. Jhansa is being<\/p>\n
             constg. In the Pvt. Land belongs to Sh.Sube Singh S\/o Sh.Mann<\/p>\n
             Singh & Sh.Ranbir Singh S\/o Sh.Sube Singh of residents of<\/p>\n
             Vill. Jhansa which has been internally exchanged in between<\/p>\n
             Gram Panchayat Vill. Jhansa & above Pvt. Land owners.<\/p>\n
             While furnishing an affidavits in this regard, the Pvt. Land<\/p>\n
             owner has also requested there by to provide the 24 hours<\/p>\n
             regular electric Power Supply to his tubewells installed in his<\/p>\n
             land bearing A\/c No.JAP-152 & JAP-177 (copy attached).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             Since the land offered by gram Panchayat Vill. Jhansa was not
\n CWP No.15584 of 2008                                              [3]<\/p>\n
            found suitable to the technical point of view, therefore, efforts<\/p>\n
            were made at their level to exchange the land in between them<\/p>\n
            so as to meet the requirement of the deptt. Further the land has<\/p>\n
            been offered free of cost and the civil constn. works are at<\/p>\n
            advance stage.\n<\/p>\n
                  The fulfill the commitment made in the interest of<\/p>\n
            departmental work as well as to avoid any delay in<\/p>\n
            completion of scheduled work. It is requested that the<\/p>\n
            concerned higher authorities may be approached to provide<\/p>\n
            the 24 hours regular Power Supply facility to their<\/p>\n
            tubewells bearing above A\/c Nos.\n<\/p>\n
                  An early action in the matter is requested because the<\/p>\n
            Pvt. Land owners are pressing for the same.”\n<\/p>\n
Executive Engineer in categorical term had stated that a commitment was<\/p>\n
made in the interest of departmental working that petitioners will be<\/p>\n
provided 24 hours regular power supply facility. Thereafter, Annexure P3,<\/p>\n
another communication was sent by the Executive Engineer, Operation<\/p>\n
Division, Shahbad. The relevant portion of the letter read as under:-<\/p>\n
                  “You are therefore requested to check the feasibility to<\/p>\n
            the 24 hrs. supply to above A\/c Nos. to fulfill the commitment<\/p>\n
            made in the interest of departmental work.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
It is apparent that the officials of the department had made commitment on<\/p>\n
behalf and in the interest of organisation UHBVNL. Thereafter, petitioners<\/p>\n
served notice Annexure P4.        The notice was replied by the S.D.O.<\/p>\n
Operations, UHBVNL, Ajrana Kalan. The S.D.O. replied that power supply<\/p>\n
for a tubewell is not feasible as 24 hours line is provided for domestic
\n CWP No.15584 of 2008                                               [4]<\/p>\n
purpose.    Petitioner No.1 was directed to contact S.D.O. for fruitful<\/p>\n
solution.   On 24.10.2007, S.D.O., Operations, Ajrana Kalan wrote to<\/p>\n
Executive Engineer, Operation Division, Shahabad that office has already<\/p>\n
submitted an estimate for supply of power in compliance with the directions<\/p>\n
of the office.\n<\/p>\n
             The commitment and promise made by the officials bore no<\/p>\n
fruit. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.<\/p>\n
             In the written statement, respondents had taken a stand that<\/p>\n
officials who made the commitments and promise were not authorised to do<\/p>\n
so and UHBVNL cannot provide 24 hours power supply.<\/p>\n
             Promise and commitment extended by Executive Engineer in<\/p>\n
letters Annexures P2 and P3 ought to have raised the legitimate expectation<\/p>\n
of the petitioners.      Therefore, it becomes necessary to rely upon the<\/p>\n
observations     of   Constitution   Bench   of   Hon’ble   Apex     Court   in<\/p>\n
Confederation of Ex-servicemen Associations and others v. Union of<\/p>\n
India and others<\/a>, (2006)8 SCC 399. It will be apposite to reproduce the<\/p>\n
following observations of their Lordships in the above said case:-<\/p>\n
                      “33. We are also not impressed by the argument that all<\/p>\n
             medical benefits and facilities must be provided to ex-<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             servicemen under the doctrine of “legitimate expectation”. The<\/p>\n
             doctrine of “legitimate expectation” is a “latest recruit” to a<\/p>\n
             long list of concepts fashioned by the courts for review of<\/p>\n
             administrative actions. No doubt, the doctrine has an important<\/p>\n
             place in the development of administrative law and particularly<\/p>\n
             law relating to “judicial review”. Under the said doctrine, a<\/p>\n
             person may have reasonable or legitimate expectation of being
\n CWP No.15584 of 2008                                                [5]<\/p>\n
           treated in a certain way by an administrative authority even<\/p>\n
           though he has no right in law to receive the benefit. In such a<\/p>\n
           situation, if a decision is taken by an administrative authority<\/p>\n
           adversely affecting his interest, he may have justifiable<\/p>\n
           grievance in the light of the fact of continuous receipt of the<\/p>\n
           benefit, legitimate expectation to receive the benefit or<\/p>\n
           privilege which he has enjoyed all throughout.                 Such<\/p>\n
           expectation may arise either from the express promise or from<\/p>\n
           consistent practice which the applicant may reasonably expect<\/p>\n
           to continue.\n<\/p>\n
                 34. The expression “legitimate expectation” appears to<\/p>\n
           have been originated by Lord Denning, M.R. In the leading<\/p>\n
           decision of Schmidt v. Secy. Of State. In Attorney General of<\/p>\n
           Hog Kong v. Ng Yuen Shiu, Lord Fraser referring to Schmidt<\/p>\n
           stated : (All ER p. 350 h-j)<\/p>\n
                          “The expectations may be based on some<\/p>\n
                 statement or undertaking by, or on behalf of, the public<\/p>\n
                 authority which has the duty of making the decision, if<\/p>\n
                 the authority has, through its officers, acted in a way<\/p>\n
                 that would make it unfair or inconsistent with good<\/p>\n
                 administration for him to be denied such an inquiry.”<\/p>\n
                                                   (emphasis supplied)<\/p>\n
                 35. In such cases, therefore, the Court may not insist an<\/p>\n
           administrative authority to act judicially but may still insist it to<\/p>\n
           act fairly. The doctrine is based on the principle that good<\/p>\n
           administration demands observance of reasonableness and
\n CWP No.15584 of 2008                                              [6]<\/p>\n
            where it has adopted a particular practice for a long time even<\/p>\n
            in the absence of a provision of law, it should adhere to such<\/p>\n
            practice without depriving its citizens of the benefit enjoyed or<\/p>\n
            privilege exercised.”\n<\/p>\n
Therefore, this Court proceeds to decide the case taking into consideration<\/p>\n
the observations of Hon’ble Apex Court and the communications issued by<\/p>\n
the Executive Engineer and S.D.O. Of the respondent-UHBVNL. Even<\/p>\n
though, this Court is conscious that in the case of Confederation of Ex-<\/p>\n
servicemen Associations’s case (supra) on the facts of that case relief was<\/p>\n
not granted holding that no right of legitimate expectation vests in<\/p>\n
Confederation of Ex-servicemen Associations’s case (supra).<\/p>\n
            On 25.8.2009, the matter was adjourned to 17.11.2009. On<\/p>\n
17.11.2009 the matter was adjourned for today as Mr.Narender Hooda,<\/p>\n
counsel for the respondents prayed that an adjournment be granted so that<\/p>\n
he is able to seek instructions from the concerned quarters.              The<\/p>\n
adjournment was granted primarily on the ground to explore the possibility<\/p>\n
whether the respondents can provide any solace to the petitioners who due<\/p>\n
to the commitments and promise made by the officials had agreed to<\/p>\n
exchange their land. It is not disputed that 1 acre 4 kanals of land was<\/p>\n
exchanged for 3 kanals and 10 marlas of land.\n<\/p>\n
            On the bidding of the respondents, today Mr.Narender Hooda<\/p>\n
has taken a somersault and stated that though the commitment made was<\/p>\n
unauthorised but the land given to the petitioners by the Gram Panchayat<\/p>\n
was in consonance of the resolution and the resolution specifically state that<\/p>\n
no loss will be caused to the Gram Panchayat. The tenor of the resolution<\/p>\n
state that interest of the Gram Panchayat has been taken care of so that
\n CWP No.15584 of 2008                                               [7]<\/p>\n
petitioner No.1 is not accused that he had taken benefit of the Gram<\/p>\n
Panchayat land. The matter of fact remain that petitioner had parted 1 acre 4<\/p>\n
kanals of land for 3 kanals and 10 marlas of land. Even if the contention of<\/p>\n
Mr.Narender Hooda is accepted that the land is of equal value, yet there is<\/p>\n
no need for the petitioners to exchange their land. Admittedly, both the<\/p>\n
lands are agricultural. The harvest from 1 acre and 4 kanals and from 3<\/p>\n
kanals and 10 marlas cannot be equal.\n<\/p>\n
               The petition raise another important issue whether to facilitate<\/p>\n
development work, illiterate villagers who to earn goodwill or promise<\/p>\n
made believe the officials of the rank of Executive Engineer, to whom they<\/p>\n
perceive to be an important functionary should execute memorandum of<\/p>\n
understanding with the Chairman or Managing Director. Executive<\/p>\n
Engineer had gone to the site and facilitated exchange of the land for<\/p>\n
construction of 33 K.V. Sub Station. The credibility of the respondent-state<\/p>\n
is at stake.    Therefore, dismissal of the writ petition on two legal and<\/p>\n
technical grounds that the promise was extended by the persons who were<\/p>\n
not authorised may leave the citizens with wounds unhealed for all times to<\/p>\n
come. Their generations may curse the fore-fathers and propagate to take a<\/p>\n
lesson not to believe the words extended by the officials of respondents.<\/p>\n
Respondent-UHBVNL is none else but instrumentality of the State. A sour<\/p>\n
soul, unsatisfied citizen may feel cheated forever for the conduct of the<\/p>\n
respondent-State. This will not auger well for the honour of the State, who<\/p>\n
claims itself to be Welfare State. Even though this Court cannot issue<\/p>\n
mandamus that petitioners be supplied 24 hours power supply as promised<\/p>\n
by the officials of respondent-UHBVNL, yet due to the promises made by<\/p>\n
the officials of the respondents who were responsible officers, petitioners
\n CWP No.15584 of 2008                                            [8]<\/p>\n
are required to be compensated in monetary terms. To balance equities, it<\/p>\n
is ordered that petitioners be granted a compensation of Rs.One lac. The<\/p>\n
compensation has not been quantified to assess the loss but to save the<\/p>\n
situation in which petitioners landed themselves, as the repercussion of the<\/p>\n
action of the respondents may erode the faith of the people and hamper the<\/p>\n
development work for common purpose. With these directions, the writ<\/p>\n
petition stand disposed of. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                              ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA )
\nNovember 25, 2009.                      JUDGE<\/p>\n
RC\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam … on 25 November, 2009 CWP No.15584 of 2008 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C. W. P. No. 15584 of 2008 Date of Decision: 25 – 11 – 2009 Sube Singh etc. ….Petitioners v. Uttri Haryana Bijli […]<\/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-131388","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 25 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 25 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-07-17T18:34:33+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam … on 25 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-17T18:34:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1840,\"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\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 25 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-17T18:34:33+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam … on 25 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 25 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 25 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-07-17T18:34:33+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam … on 25 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-17T18:34:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009"},"wordCount":1840,"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\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009","name":"Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 25 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-17T18:34:33+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sube-singh-etc-vs-uttri-haryana-bijli-vitran-nigam-on-25-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sube Singh Etc vs Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam … on 25 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/131388","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=131388"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/131388\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=131388"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=131388"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=131388"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}