{"id":141026,"date":"2007-09-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-09-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007"},"modified":"2016-01-14T08:02:12","modified_gmt":"2016-01-14T02:32:12","slug":"ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007","title":{"rendered":"Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House &#8230; on 28 September, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House &#8230; on 28 September, 2007<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S.B.Sinha<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S.B. Sinha, H.S. Bedi<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  4586 of 2007\n\nPETITIONER:\nRam Nandan Singh &amp; Ors\n\nRESPONDENT:\nAG Office Employees Co-op  House Construction Society Ltd.,Ranchi &amp; Ors.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 28\/09\/2007\n\nBENCH:\nS.B. SINHA &amp; H.S. BEDI\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<br \/>\n(arising out of  SLP(C) No. 8265\/2006)<\/p>\n<p>\tS.B.SINHA,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(1)\tThis appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated<br \/>\n6.1.2006 of the Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court in Letters Patent Appeal<br \/>\nNo. 101 of 2004 whereby and whereunder it was directed:\n<\/p>\n<p>Having heard the parties, we are of the view that this Court having<br \/>\nbecome functus officio, after disposal of the appeal, is not required to<br \/>\ndecide any question in the present appeal, but only with a view to enable<br \/>\nthe competent authority to pass order under Section 41 of the Co-<br \/>\noperative Societies Act and the other related provisions of the said Act<br \/>\nand to find out whether nullification of some of the allotments is to be<br \/>\nmade or any appropriate steps in that behalf will have to be taken, the<br \/>\ncase is remitted to the competent authority i.e. Registrar, Co-operative<br \/>\nSocieties, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, who will not rely on the<br \/>\nearlier report, submitted by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies,<br \/>\nGovernment of Jharkhand, Ranchi, having been superseded by the<br \/>\nreport, submitted by Mr. Justice (Retd.) Vikramaditya Prasad.  The<br \/>\nRegistrar, Co-operative Societies, Ranchi, will look into the enquiry<br \/>\nreport and after giving opportunity to the appellants and other necessary<br \/>\nparties, will determine the question as to what action, if any, is required<br \/>\nto be taken in accordance with law, preferably within four months from<br \/>\nthe date of receipt\/production of a copy of this order.  It will be open to<br \/>\nthe appellants to point out the defect, if any, in the enquiry report,<br \/>\nsubmitted by Mr. Justice (Retd.) Vikramaditya Prasad. The Registrar,<br \/>\nCo-operative Societies, will apply its independent mind and will<br \/>\ndetermine as to whether he will differ with the enquiry report or will<br \/>\naccept the same or part thereof and what action is required to be taken<br \/>\nunder the law.  No further order is required to be passed in the present<br \/>\ncase.<\/p>\n<p>\t(3)\tLands were acquired in the year 1970 for the benefit of the<br \/>\nmembers of Respondent No.1-Society.  It is stated that in the year 1983 by purported<br \/>\namendments carried out in the Rules, outsiders were also allowed allotment of lands by<br \/>\nthe said Society. When the question whether such amendments should be permitted or<br \/>\nnot was pending consideration before the competent authorities, serious irregularities<br \/>\nby the members of the Managing Committee were pointed out. An inquiry was directed<br \/>\nto be made by the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies on the intervention of the<br \/>\nChief Secretary of the State. The said authority submitted its report. On the basis of<br \/>\nthe said report, the Managing Committee of the Society was placed under suspension.<br \/>\n\t(4)\tA writ petition filed thereagainst by the Managing Committee of<br \/>\nthe Society  was dismissed.   On an intra court appeal having been preferred<br \/>\nthereagainst being Letters Patent Appeal No.101 of 2004, the Division Bench of the<br \/>\nHigh Court passed the following order on 10.3.2004:\n<\/p>\n<p>It is seen that the learned single Judge has directed the Circle Officer,<br \/>\nRanchi to be in-charge of the affairs of the Society temporarily.  We direct<br \/>\nhim to take charge temporarily as per the direction of the learned single<br \/>\nJudge, if he has not already done so.  If warranted, the Superintendent of<br \/>\nPolice, Ranchi is directed to give him the necessary protection to comply<br \/>\nwith the direction issued by the learned Single Judge in the judgment<br \/>\nunder appeal.  He will also make a search to find out whether the<br \/>\nconcerned amendment of the By-laws of the Society had been approved by<br \/>\nthe Registrar and whether any document is available in the Society in that<br \/>\nbehalf and if such a document is available, make it available to the<br \/>\nGovernment counsel for being produced in this Court.<br \/>\n(5)\tBy another order dated 18.5.2004(CAV on 20.4.2004),the Division Bench<br \/>\nupon consideration of all<\/p>\n<p>aspects of the matter directed  as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>Then, the question is, who would conduct the inquiry.  According to<br \/>\nlearned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, it can only be<br \/>\nconducted by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies.  Counsel for the<br \/>\nintervener went to the extent of submitting that the inquiry should be<br \/>\nentrusted to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), since it can be<br \/>\nseen that it was sought to be thwarted by influential persons at every<br \/>\nstage.  Consistent with our finding that the Government has the power to<br \/>\nmake an enquiry, the same can be entrusted to any agency.  The learned<br \/>\nAdvocate General submitted that the inquiry must be ordered by this<br \/>\nCourt, so that any possible impediment to the inquiry could be<br \/>\neliminated.  From the submissions of the learned Advocate General, the<br \/>\nimpression we gather is that it is possible that every attempt would be<br \/>\nmade to scuttle a proper inquiry into the complaint, unless there is<br \/>\nbacking of the authority of this Court for the conduct of the inquiry.  We<br \/>\ndo not think that at this stage, we should entrust the inquiry to the<br \/>\nCentral Bureau of Investigation.  We think that it will be appropriate to<br \/>\ndirect the inquiry to be made by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies<br \/>\nas authorized by this order of this Court.  The Registrar of Cooperative<br \/>\nSocieties will be directly answerable to this Court for the proper conduct<br \/>\nof the inquiry and he will ensure that a thorough inquiry is conducted<br \/>\nafter adhering to all principles of natural justice.  If the finding at the<br \/>\ninquiry to be submitted before this Court, justifies action under section<br \/>\n41 of the Act and the other related provisions of the Cooperative<br \/>\nSocieties Act and the nullification of some of the allotments made,<br \/>\nappropriate steps in that behalf will have to be taken by the Registrar.<br \/>\nThese aspects can also be taken up and considered by this Court after<br \/>\nthe inquiry is completed.  Suffice it to say that in suppression of the<br \/>\ndirection of the learned Single Judge, we direct thorough inquiry to be<br \/>\nmade into the complaints by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, after<br \/>\ngiving an opportunity of being heard to the appellants and to the<br \/>\ninterveners.  The report of the inquiry in a sealed cover will be produced<br \/>\nbefore this Court by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies and<br \/>\nappropriate follow up orders obtained.  The enquiry will be completed in<br \/>\nthree months.  The Registrar of Cooperative Societies will be answerable<br \/>\nto this Court for the conduct of the enquiry.  On the completion of the<br \/>\ninquiry, it will also be open to the appellants to move this Court for an<br \/>\nappropriate direction regarding the management of the Society&#8230;<br \/>\n(emphasis supplied)<\/p>\n<p> \tWith the aforementioned directions, the appeal was dismissed.<br \/>\n\t(6)\tHowever, the question in regard to the correctness or otherwise<br \/>\nof the report of the Registrar, Cooperative Societies again having been raised, the<br \/>\nDivision Bench of the High Court by an order dated 2.9.2005 directed as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\t     Having heard the learned counsels of the respective parties on the<br \/>\nsaid report and after considering the provisions of Section 41 of the Bihar<br \/>\nCooperative Societies Act, and having further regard to the suggestions<br \/>\nmade by Mr. Y.V. Giri appearing for the appellants that the report of the<br \/>\nenquiry by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies was biased and did not<br \/>\npresent a true picture of the situation, we are of the view that a fresh<br \/>\nenquiry may be made by a retired High Court Judge at the expense of the<br \/>\nappellants so that the controversy can be set at rest.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tHaving regard to the above, we appoint Mr. Vikramaditya Prasad, a<br \/>\nformer Judge of this Court to hold an enquiry into the allegations made<br \/>\nagainst the Managing Committee and the irregularities said to have been<br \/>\ncommitted even during the holding of the elections and to submit a report<br \/>\nto this Court within a month from the date on which he chooses to enter<br \/>\nupon the reference, which we hope will be not later than one week after<br \/>\nreceipt of this order.  For the purpose of enquiring into the allegations, the<br \/>\nlearned Judge may be assisted by the parties involved and their learned<br \/>\nAdvocates who are all requested to cooperate with the learned Judge.  The<br \/>\nlearned Judge will be paid a consolidated remuneration of Rs.30,000\/- to<br \/>\nbe deposited by the appellants with the Registrar General of this Court<br \/>\nwithin a week from date.  The learned Judge will be entitled to withdraw<br \/>\nthe said amount towards his remuneration.(emphasis supplied)<br \/>\n\t (7)\tPursuant thereto, an inquiry was made and a report filed.<br \/>\nRespondent No.2 herein &#8211; the Managing Committee of the Society questioned the<br \/>\ncorrectness of the said report by filing another application in the said Letters Patent<br \/>\nAppeal.   A Division Bench of the High Court although noticed that the Letters Patent<br \/>\nAppeal was heard and disposed of by an order dated 18.5.2004 and,thus, the Court<br \/>\nhad become functus officio, yet  proceeded to make certain observations which, in our<br \/>\nopinion, were wholly unwarranted. The said observations are as under:<br \/>\n. the case is remitted to the competent authority i.e. Registrar, Co-<br \/>\noperative Societies, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, who will not rely<br \/>\non the earlier report, submitted by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies,<br \/>\nGovernment of Jharkhand, Ranchi, having been superseded by the<br \/>\nreport, submitted by Mr. Justice (Retd.) Vikramaditya Prasad.  The<br \/>\nRegistrar, Co-operative Societies, Ranchi, will look into the enquiry<br \/>\nreport and after giving opportunity to the appellants and other necessary<br \/>\nparties, will determine the question as to what action, if any, is required<br \/>\nto be taken in accordance with law, preferably within four months from<br \/>\nthe date of receipt\/production of a copy of this order.  It will be open to<br \/>\nthe appellants to point out the defect, if any, in the enquiry report,<br \/>\nsubmitted by Mr. Justice (Retd.) Vikramaditya Prasad. The Registrar,<br \/>\nCo-operative Societies, will apply its independent mind and will<br \/>\ndetermine as to whether he will differ with the enquiry report or will<br \/>\naccept the same or part thereof and what action is required to be taken<br \/>\nunder the law.  No further order is required to be passed in the present<br \/>\ncase.<br \/>\n\t (8)\tAppellants before us were impleaded as interveners before the<br \/>\nlearned Single Judge. They, by this petition for grant of special leave, have questioned<br \/>\nthe justifiability or otherwise of the aforementioned observations of the Division Bench.<br \/>\n\t(9)\tMs. Bagchi, learned Counsel appearing for the erstwhile<br \/>\nManaging Committee questions the locus of the appellants to prefer this appeal relying<br \/>\non the decisions of this Court in N. Swain and Another vs. B.K. Mohapatra and<br \/>\nOthers., (1970)  3 SCC  321 and <a href=\"\/doc\/833292\/\">Ravi Rao Gaikwad and Others vs. Rajajinagar Youth<br \/>\nSocial Welfare Assn. And Others,<\/a> (2006) 5 SCC 62.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(10)\tThe interveners in this case were not only permitted to intervene<br \/>\nby the learned Single Judge but as is evident from the records that they were parties in<br \/>\nthe Letters Patent Appeal also.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(11)\tIn N. Swains case (supra), this Court was concerned with grant<br \/>\nof a certificate in terms of Article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution of India and in that<br \/>\ncontext it was observed that the interveners having no statutory right to prefer an<br \/>\nappeal such certificate could not have been granted by the High Court.<br \/>\n\t(12)\tIn Ravi Rao Gaikwads case (supra), this Court observed that the<br \/>\npurpose of grant of application for intervention is to entitle the interveners  to address<br \/>\narguments in support of one or the other side.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(13)\tAppellants are members of the Society. They have been pursuing<br \/>\ntheir cause before the High Court. They were impleaded as parties in the Letters<br \/>\nPatent Appeal. Not only in the capacity of interveners but also as persons aggrieved,<br \/>\nthey are, therefore, entitled to file petition for grant of special leave.  The preliminary<br \/>\nobjection in regard to maintainability of the appeal raised by Ms. Bagchi is rejected.<br \/>\n\t(14)\tIndisputably, the Registrar of Cooperative Societies appointed<br \/>\nunder the Bihar Cooperative Societies Act, 1935 which was adopted by the State of<br \/>\nJharkhand on bifurcation of the State as per provisions of the State Organisation Act is<br \/>\na statutory authority. The Registrar of Cooperative Societies in exercise of his powers<br \/>\nconferred upon him in terms of Section 41 and\/or Section 48 of the said Act is entitled<br \/>\nto pass an appropriate order. The orders passed by the Registrar, Cooperative<br \/>\nSocieties are appealable.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(15)\tWhosoever had enquired into the charges levelled against the<br \/>\nerstwhile members of the Managing Committee, indisputably the inquiry report is to<br \/>\nbe placed before the Registrar so as to enable him to arrive at a decision. An order by a<br \/>\nstatutory authority, therefore, must be passed in terms of the provisions of the Act<br \/>\nwherefor the inquiry report must be looked into. The report of a retired Judge of the<br \/>\nHigh Court, indisputably will carry great weight. It must be given an effective<br \/>\nconsideration.\n<\/p>\n<p>      (16)\tThe State of Jharkhand in its counter affidavit stated as under:<br \/>\n  Directing the Registrar Cooperative Societies to invite objections and<br \/>\nhaving the liberty of differing with the report of Mr. Justice (Retd.)<br \/>\nVikramaditya Prasad has opened a pandoras box and at the same time<br \/>\nset a bad precedent as the executive wing does not override the report<br \/>\nsubmitted by a committee duly constituted by the Honble Jharkhand<br \/>\nHigh Court and moreover headed by a retired judicial authority.<\/p>\n<p>\t(17)\tWe are, thus, of the opinion that no observation was required to<br \/>\nbe made in relation thereto. Suffice, it to say that it is for the Registrar, Cooperative<br \/>\nSocieties to take a decision in the matter and for that purpose it was wholly<br \/>\nunnecessary for the Division Bench of the High Court to make any observation as to<br \/>\nhow the said statutory authority should proceed in the matter. The statutory authority<br \/>\nis duty-bound to proceed in accordance with law and  exercise  its jurisdiction within<br \/>\nthe four corners of the Statute.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(18)\tWe are, therefore, of the opinion that the Registrar, Cooperative<br \/>\nSocieties shall now proceed to determine the issue pending before him  on the basis of<br \/>\nthe inquiry report placed before him  and all other relevant materials, without in any<br \/>\nway being influenced by the observations of the High Court in its impugned judgment.<br \/>\n\t(19)\tThe appeal is allowed with the aforementioned observations. No<br \/>\ncosts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House &#8230; on 28 September, 2007 Author: S.B.Sinha Bench: S.B. Sinha, H.S. Bedi CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 4586 of 2007 PETITIONER: Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors RESPONDENT: AG Office Employees Co-op House Construction Society Ltd.,Ranchi &amp; Ors. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 28\/09\/2007 [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-141026","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House ... on 28 September, 2007 - 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\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House ... on 28 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-09-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-14T02:32:12+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House &#8230; on 28 September, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-14T02:32:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007\"},\"wordCount\":2357,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007\",\"name\":\"Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House ... on 28 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-14T02:32:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House &#8230; on 28 September, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House ... on 28 September, 2007 - 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\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House ... on 28 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-09-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-14T02:32:12+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House &#8230; on 28 September, 2007","datePublished":"2007-09-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-14T02:32:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007"},"wordCount":2357,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007","name":"Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House ... on 28 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-09-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-14T02:32:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ram-nandan-singh-ors-vs-ag-office-employees-co-op-house-on-28-september-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ram Nandan Singh &amp; Ors vs Ag Office Employees Co-Op House &#8230; on 28 September, 2007"}]},{"@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\/141026","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=141026"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141026\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=141026"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=141026"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=141026"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}