{"id":143100,"date":"2006-11-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-11-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006"},"modified":"2016-04-24T19:19:46","modified_gmt":"2016-04-24T13:49:46","slug":"national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006","title":{"rendered":"National Institute Of &#8230; vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">National Institute Of &#8230; vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A Pasayat<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Arijit Pasayat, Lokeshwar Singh Panta<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  4911 of 2006\n\nPETITIONER:\nNational Institute of Technology,Jamshedpur &amp; Ors.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nChandra Shekhar Chaudhary\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 13\/11\/2006\n\nBENCH:\nARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<br \/>\n(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 15833 of 2004)<\/p>\n<p>ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tChallenge in this appeal is to the judgment rendered by a<br \/>\nDivision Bench of the Jharkhand High Court dismissing the<br \/>\nLetters Patent Appeal filed by the appellant against the<br \/>\njudgment of the learned Single Judge in a writ petition.  The<br \/>\nrespondent filed a writ petition for a direction to the appellant<br \/>\nto relieve him so that he would be in a position to pursue his<br \/>\nPh.D course in Indian Institute of Technology, Madras (in<br \/>\nshort &#8216;IIT&#8217;).\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe background facts in a nutshell are as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>The writ petitioner (respondent herein) is an Associate<br \/>\nProfessor in Metallurgical Engineering Department of the<br \/>\nNational Institute of Technology, Jamshedpur, the appellant<br \/>\nherein. According to the writ petition, the writ petitioner<br \/>\nsubmitted an application for admission in Quality<br \/>\nImprovement Programme (QIP) sponsored by AICTE through<br \/>\nRegional Institute of Technology, Jamshedpur. He was<br \/>\nselected for admission in IIT, Madras and was asked to appear<br \/>\nat that institution for completing pre-registration formalities.<br \/>\nAccording to the writ petition, though he made an application<br \/>\nto the appellant for relieving him to make the pre-registration<br \/>\nvisit, he had been illegally and arbitrarily denied the<br \/>\npermission by the appellant. According to the writ petitioner,<br \/>\nthe action of the appellant was unreasonable and was also<br \/>\ndiscriminatory. The appellant resisted the writ petition by<br \/>\npointing out that according to the norms, if on relieving a<br \/>\nteacher to attend such a programme, the staff strength in that<br \/>\ndepartment would go below 70 percent of the fixed capacity,<br \/>\nthe permission was to be denied and if the writ petitioner was<br \/>\nto be relieved as sought for by him, the strength in that<br \/>\ndepartment would be reduced to 6l.9% of the sanctioned<br \/>\nstrength and it was in that situation that he was not accorded<br \/>\npermission to get himself registered for the course. It was also<br \/>\nsubmitted that even originally, while forwarding his<br \/>\napplication, the writ petitioner had been informed that he<br \/>\nwould be able to pursue his course only if he could be relieved<br \/>\nfrom the Institute and only if on his being relieved, the staff<br \/>\nstrength would not be reduced below 70%. The plea of<br \/>\ndiscrimination was denied and it was submitted that the writ<br \/>\npetitioner was deliberately attempting to malign the<br \/>\ndepartment by raising the bogey of his being a member of a<br \/>\nScheduled Caste and was trying even to blackmail the<br \/>\nauthorities by threatening that he would commit suicide if he<br \/>\nwas not relieved.  The writ petition deserves to be dismissed.<br \/>\n\tThough the learned Single Judge found that there was a<br \/>\nnorm providing for refusal of permission to a teacher to go in<br \/>\nfor such a course if the staff strength would be reduced below<br \/>\n70% yet it was observed that there was no consistency in that<br \/>\nregard and the norms were not followed in several cases.<br \/>\nTherefore, it would not be fair to deny such an opportunity.<br \/>\nThe appellant preferred Letters Patent Appeal before the High<br \/>\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt was pointed out that pursuant to an administrative<br \/>\ndecision dated 9.11.2003 by the Ministry of Human Resources<br \/>\nDevelopment (in short the &#8216;HRD&#8217;) the Board of Governors had<br \/>\nadopted the Leave Rules and Conduct Rules of the National<br \/>\nInstitute of Technology for implementation in the institute.<br \/>\nSuch decision was taken on the day the matter was heard by a<br \/>\nlearned Single Judge and the orders were reserved. By the<br \/>\ntime the learned Single Judge pronounced its judgment IIT,<br \/>\nDelhi Rules had already become operative and, therefore, no<br \/>\nmember of the teaching staff could be relieved for such a<br \/>\ncourse, if the available strength of the staff gets reduced below<br \/>\n85%.  To state differently, only quota of 15% could be<br \/>\npermitted for such a course.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe Division Bench held that though on principles it<br \/>\nwould have agreed with the appellant&#8217;s stand that when the<br \/>\nnorms prescribed that the strength should not be reduced<br \/>\nbelow 70% by relieving a teacher for a programme such a<br \/>\nteacher should not be relieved, yet it was held because the<br \/>\nnorm was universally implemented.  The learned Single Judge<br \/>\nwas justified in his view.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLearned counsel for the appellant submitted that merely<br \/>\nbecause there may have been any lapse in the past, that could<br \/>\nnot have been taken as a ground by the High Court to grant<br \/>\nrelief to the respondent.  It was further pointed out that the<br \/>\nrespondent did not continue his programme as Ph.D. degree at<br \/>\nIIT, Madras after April, 2005.  But as is evident from the letter<br \/>\nof IIT Madras, respondent had secured low grades in the three<br \/>\nsubjects he had appeared and he had not attended the rest of<br \/>\nthe course.  It was pointed out that the respondent has<br \/>\nmanipulated and fabricated documents to show that he was<br \/>\nbeing prevented by the functionaries of the appellant from<br \/>\ncarrying on the study course. Respondent is also guilty,<br \/>\naccording to him, of making false and biased allegations<br \/>\nagainst the functionaries of the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLearned counsel for the respondent on the other hand<br \/>\nsubmitted that there is no reason as to why a different<br \/>\nyardstick was sought to be applied for the respondent.  He was<br \/>\nthe victim of machination. The respondent has clearly<br \/>\nestablished as to how and why it was not possible for him to<br \/>\nattend the course after April, 2005.  It is submitted that the<br \/>\nappellant with mala fide intention has pursued the<br \/>\nrespondent.\n<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"\/doc\/1622758\/\">In\tState  of Haryana &amp; Ors. v.  Ram Kumar Mann<\/a><br \/>\n[1997 (3) SCC 321] this Court observed:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The   doctrine of discrimination is founded<br \/>\nupon existence of an enforceable right.  He was<br \/>\ndiscriminated and denied equality as some<br \/>\nsimilarly situated persons had been given the<br \/>\nsame relief.  Article 14 would apply only when<br \/>\ninvidious discrimination is meted out to equals<br \/>\nand similarly circumstanced without any<br \/>\nrational basis or relationship in that behalf.<br \/>\nThe respondent has no right, whatsoever and<br \/>\ncannot be given the relief wrongly given to<br \/>\nthem, i.e., benefit of withdrawal of resignation.<br \/>\nThe High Court was wholly wrong in reaching<br \/>\nthe conclusion that there was invidious<br \/>\ndiscrimination. If we cannot allow a wrong to<br \/>\nperpetrate, an employee, after committing mis-<br \/>\nappropriation of money, is dismissed from<br \/>\nservice and subsequently\tthat order is<br \/>\nwithdrawn and he is reinstated into the<br \/>\nservice. Can a similarly Circumstanced person<br \/>\nclaim equality under Section 14 for<br \/>\nReinstatement?  The answer is obviously &#8220;No&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>In a converse case, in the first instance, one may be<br \/>\nwrong but the wrong order cannot be the foundation for<br \/>\nclaiming equality for enforcement of the same order.  As stated<br \/>\nearlier, his right must be founded upon enforceable right to<br \/>\nentitle him to the equality treatment for enforcement thereof.<br \/>\nA wrong decision by the Government does not give a right to<br \/>\nenforce the wrong order and claim parity or equality. Two<br \/>\nwrongs can never make a right&#8221;. [See: <a href=\"\/doc\/404981\/\">State of Bihar and<br \/>\nothers v. Kameshwar Prasad Singh and Another<\/a> (2000) 9 SCC<br \/>\n94, <a href=\"\/doc\/1793312\/\">Vikrama Shama Shetty v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.<\/a><br \/>\n(2006 (6) SCC 70), <a href=\"\/doc\/1506304\/\">South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. v. Prem<br \/>\nKumar Sharma and Ors.<\/a> (2006 (7) SCALE 240), <a href=\"\/doc\/1445309\/\">Ekta Shakti<br \/>\nFoundation v. Government of NCT of Delhi (JT<\/a> 2006 (6) SC\n<\/p>\n<p>500), and <a href=\"\/doc\/1506304\/\">South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. v. Prem Kumar<br \/>\nSharma and Ors. (AIR<\/a> 2006 SC 2727).\n<\/p>\n<p>\tMerely because in some cases the norms may not have<br \/>\nbeen followed that cannot be a ground to hold that departure<br \/>\nfrom norms should be continued. There are serious allegations<br \/>\nabout respondent having manipulated and fabricated<br \/>\ndocuments to substantiate his stand.  We need not go into<br \/>\nthese allegations.  But as has been fairly accepted by the<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the respondent, there is no official<br \/>\ncommunication from IIT Madras to support the respondent&#8217;s<br \/>\nstand that he was asked by the authorities of the said institute<br \/>\nnot to attend the programme.  There should have been some<br \/>\nmaterial to support the stand. Unfortunately, for the<br \/>\nrespondent there is none.  On the other hand admittedly after<br \/>\nApril, 2005 the respondent had abandoned the programme.  It<br \/>\nis also on record that the appellant notwithstanding these<br \/>\nfacts had asked the respondent to report back to IIT, Madras<br \/>\nto continue studies in terms of High Court&#8217;s direction.  But<br \/>\nthat does not seem to have been done by the respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe inevitable result is that the orders of the learned<br \/>\nSingle Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court cannot<br \/>\nbe maintained and are accordingly set aside. The appeal is<br \/>\nallowed but in the circumstances without any order as to<br \/>\ncosts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India National Institute Of &#8230; vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006 Author: A Pasayat Bench: Arijit Pasayat, Lokeshwar Singh Panta CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 4911 of 2006 PETITIONER: National Institute of Technology,Jamshedpur &amp; Ors. RESPONDENT: Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13\/11\/2006 BENCH: ARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA JUDGMENT: [&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-143100","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>National Institute Of ... vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006 - 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\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"National Institute Of ... vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006\" \/>\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=\"2006-11-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-04-24T13:49:46+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\\\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"National Institute Of &#8230; vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-11-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-24T13:49:46+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1426,\"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\\\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006\",\"name\":\"National Institute Of ... vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-11-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-24T13:49:46+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"National Institute Of &#8230; vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006\"}]},{\"@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":"National Institute Of ... vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006 - 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\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"National Institute Of ... vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-11-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-04-24T13:49:46+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\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"National Institute Of &#8230; vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006","datePublished":"2006-11-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-24T13:49:46+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006"},"wordCount":1426,"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\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006","name":"National Institute Of ... vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-11-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-24T13:49:46+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/national-institute-of-vs-chandra-shekhar-chaudhary-on-13-november-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"National Institute Of &#8230; vs Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary on 13 November, 2006"}]},{"@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\/143100","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=143100"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143100\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=143100"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=143100"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=143100"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}