{"id":164451,"date":"2009-03-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009"},"modified":"2018-07-19T17:50:28","modified_gmt":"2018-07-19T12:20:28","slug":"ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI\n                                    W.P. (S) No. 5193 of 2008\n                                               ---\nRagho Sharan Singh                                                                   Petitioner\n                                         Versus\nBharat Coking Coal Limited through its\nChairman cum Managing Director and others                                 Respondents\n                                            ---\nCORAM:               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.G.R. PATNAIK\n                                            ---\nFor the Petitioner:  Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Saurav Arun, Advocate\nFor the Respondents: Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta and Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, Advocates\n                                            ---\n                                          CAV ORDER\n                                                 ---\nReserved On: 19.03.2009                                   Pronounced On: _22.03.2009\n                                             ---\n9. 22.3.2009<\/pre>\n<p> The petitioner was appointed in the establishment of the respondent BCCL in the<br \/>\nyear 1974. At the time of his appointment, his service record was opened wherein his date of<br \/>\nbirth was recorded as 27.12.1957 and the same date of birth was entered in Form-B Register,<br \/>\nService Excerpt and NEIS Form. As per the aforesaid entry, the petitioner is expected to<br \/>\nsuperannuate in December 2017.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.     The grievance of the petitioner is that he was unexpectedly served with the notice dated<br \/>\n27.5.2008 (Annexure-9) intimating that he would attain the age of superannuation i.e. 60 years<br \/>\non 30.11.2008, as per the entry recorded in respect of his date of birth in his service records.\n<\/p>\n<p>       Petitioner&#8217;s claim in this writ application is for quashing the aforesaid notice (Annexure-\n<\/p>\n<p>9) and also for directing the respondents to correct the entry regarding his date of birth and<br \/>\nrecord the same as 27.12.1957 instead of 25.11.1948 and allow the petitioner to continue in<br \/>\nservice till he attains the age of 60 years as counted from 27.12.1957.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.     Counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent BCCL, wherein grounds<br \/>\nadvanced by the petitioner, has been denied and disputed.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent<br \/>\nBCCL.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.     Sri A.K.Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was<br \/>\ninitially appointed on 27.12.1974 as a time rated worker. Subsequently, a new Form-B Register<br \/>\nwas prepared by the BCCL in which his date of birth was recorded as 27.12.1957. Learned<br \/>\ncounsel submits that after having accepted this entry as the correct entry of the petitioner&#8217;s date<br \/>\nof birth, and continuing with the same for more than 25 years, the respondents are now wanting<br \/>\nto change the entry by referring the petitioner&#8217;s case to the Date of Birth Committee (DOBC).<br \/>\nSuch action on the part of the respondents, according to the learned counsel, is totally arbitrary<br \/>\nand illegal since the petitioner was neither served with any notice, nor was he informed that the<br \/>\nrespondents had contemplated to change the entry regarding his date of birth in his service<br \/>\nrecords. Learned counsel adds further that by obtaining a misleading report from the DOB<br \/>\nCommittee, that too behind the back of the petitioner, the respondents have now arbitrarily and<br \/>\nillegally proceeded to change the date of birth of the petitioner after more than 25 years.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.     Shri A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the respondents, submits on the other hand, that the<br \/>\npresent writ application is not maintainable since the petitioner has sought for change in the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                     2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>entry regarding his date of birth at the fag end of his service. Learned counsel explains that the<br \/>\npetitioner was initially appointed under the erstwhile National Coal Development Corporation<br \/>\nLimited (NCDC) at Sudamdih Shaft Mine. Prior to his appointment, he was medically examined<br \/>\non 25.12.1974 and upon such examination, the Civil Surgeon had recorded the petitioner&#8217;s age<br \/>\nas 26 years. Learned counsel would explain that though subsequently, in the Form-B Register,<br \/>\nthe petitioner&#8217;s date of birth was recorded as 27.12.1957, but later on when the error was<br \/>\ndetected, the petitioner&#8217;s case was referred to the Date of Birth Committee, which on<br \/>\nexamination of the records of the petitioner, had concluded that the date of birth of the petitioner<br \/>\nis 25.12.1948 and not 25.12.1957. Upon communication of the above conclusion of the DOB<br \/>\nCommittee, the respondents had made the correction of the entry of the petitioner&#8217;s date of birth<br \/>\nin the Form-B Register and had also communicated the decision of the DOB Committee to the<br \/>\npetitioner vide letter dated 18\/21.02.2000 (Annexure-2). Learned counsel adds that even though,<br \/>\nsuch communication was conveyed to the petitioner vide Annexure-2 dated 21.2.2000, but he<br \/>\nhad never raised any grievance against the correction of the entry of his date of birth and it is<br \/>\nnow at the belated stage and at the fag end of his service, that the petitioner has chosen to agitate<br \/>\nthe correction of the entry of his date of birth.\n<\/p>\n<p>       Learned counsel would explain further that the petitioner&#8217;s claim that his date of birth is<br \/>\n27.12.1957, cannot be accepted in view of the fact that by counting his age, according to this<br \/>\ndate of birth, he would have been less than 17 years of age at the time of his induction in service<br \/>\nin the year 1974, whereas the minimum prescribed age of appointment of workers under the<br \/>\nMines Act and Rules thereunder is 18 years.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.     Contradicting the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents, learned counsel<br \/>\nfor the petitioner would want to explain that the respondents cannot place any reliance upon the<br \/>\npurported medical certificate (Annexure-A) since, firstly it is not a certificate of date of birth and<br \/>\nsecondly, the entry of the age is not based upon any authentic document or assessment. Rather,<br \/>\neven as the entry declares, the age was assessed on the basis of physical appearance only.<br \/>\nLearned counsel adds that the purported decision of the DOB Committee has not been produced<br \/>\nby the respondents on the false plea that the same was seized by the D.G.M.S. and the same has<br \/>\nnow been lost.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.     From the rival submissions of the parties, the admitted facts which emerge are that the<br \/>\npetitioner was appointed under the respondents in December 1974. A service book, known as<br \/>\nForm-B Register was opened by the respondents for the petitioner in which his date of birth was<br \/>\nrecorded as 27.12.1957. After more than 25 years, respondents have sought to change the entry<br \/>\non the ground that the Date of Birth Committee had decided that the petitioner&#8217;s date of birth<br \/>\nshould have been recorded as 25.12.1948.\n<\/p>\n<p>       Admittedly, while referring the petitioner&#8217;s case to the DOB Committee, no prior notice<br \/>\nwas given to the petitioner. Furthermore, even the Date of Birth Committee did not issue any<br \/>\nnotice to the petitioner to offer his explanation against the proposed change in the entry<br \/>\nregarding his date of birth, as appearing in the Form-B Register. Furthermore, the respondents<br \/>\nafter having accepted the entry regarding his date of birth appearing in the Form-B Register as<br \/>\n25.12.1957 have continued to treat the same date of birth as correct for more than 26 years.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                   3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>       It is apparent from the above that the respondents BCCL have unilaterally taken its<br \/>\ndecision to change the entry regarding the petitioner&#8217;s date of birth in the Form-B Register<br \/>\nwithout giving any prior notice to him. It is for the respondents to explain as to how and on what<br \/>\nbasis, the petitioner&#8217;s date of birth as 25.12.1957 was entered in the Form-B Register even<br \/>\nthough, as contended by the respondents, the medical certificate (Annexure-A) was available<br \/>\nwith them. In this context, it is relevant to note that the purported medical certificate (Annexure-<br \/>\nA) does not bear the signature or thumb impression of the petitioner, not does it appear to be an<br \/>\nauthentic document. It is also relevant to note that even by the counter-affidavit and the<br \/>\nsubmission made on behalf of the respondents, the employer has not been able to show any<br \/>\ngenuine basis or justification or any occasion for reassessment of the petitioner&#8217;s age and for<br \/>\nreferring his case to the DOB Committee after more than 25 years of acceptance of the entry<br \/>\nwhich was initially recorded in the Form-B Register.\n<\/p>\n<p>       A similar issue came up for consideration before this court in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1667415\/\">Baij Nath<br \/>\nMahato vs. M\/s Bharat Coking Coal Ltd and others<\/a> [2008(2) JLJR 308]. The court had<br \/>\nobserved that the fact that the date of birth of the writ petitioner was recorded in the statutory<br \/>\nForm-B Register and in the identity card issued to him, continued undisputed for 29 years and<br \/>\nthere being no justification for making reassessment of the age of the employee, the act of<br \/>\nforcibly superannuating the employee, that too without issuing any prior notice to him and<br \/>\nwithout affording him any opportunity of being heard, was totally arbitrary and illegal. The<br \/>\nsame ratio applies to the facts of the present case also.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.     The contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that in the instant case,<br \/>\npetitioner has raised a dispute of fact which cannot be addressed by this court in exercise of its<br \/>\nwrit jurisdiction is not tenable. In the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1455346\/\">State of Orissa vs. Dr. (Miss) Binapani Dei and<br \/>\nothers<\/a> [AIR 1967 Supreme Court 1969], the Supreme Court has held that even administrative<br \/>\norders which involve civil consequences, have to be passed consistently with the rules of<br \/>\nnatural justice. The order of compulsory retirement based on a certain disputed date of birth, can<br \/>\ncertainly be judicially reviewed where such an order is violative of the principles of natural<br \/>\njustice and passed without affording any opportunity to the employee of being heard. The same<br \/>\nview was taken by this court in the case of Narayan Das Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity<br \/>\nBoard, Ranchi and others [2005 (2) JLJR 488] and again in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/801076\/\">Jagdish Paswan vs.<br \/>\nJharkhand State Electricity Board, Ranchi and others<\/a> [2005(2) JLJR 518] and also by the<br \/>\nDivision Bench of this court in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/81804\/\">Sunder Pandit vs. Jharkhand State Electricity<br \/>\nBoard, Ranchi and others<\/a> [2006 (1) JLJR 326].\n<\/p>\n<p>10.    In the light of the above discussions, I find merit in this application. Accordingly, this<br \/>\nwrit application is allowed in terms of the relief sought for by the petitioner. The impugned<br \/>\nnotice (Annexure-9), as issued by the respondent no. 6, is hereby quashed. Respondents are<br \/>\ndirected to restore the original entry of the petitioner&#8217;s date of birth made in the Form-B<br \/>\nRegister as 27.12.1957 and treat the same for the purpose of computing the date of his<br \/>\nsuperannuation.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                                        (D.G.R. Patnaik, J)<\/p>\n<p>Ranjeet\/A.F.R.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 5193 of 2008 &#8212; Ragho Sharan Singh Petitioner Versus Bharat Coking Coal Limited through its Chairman cum Managing Director and others Respondents &#8212; CORAM: HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE D.G.R. PATNAIK [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-164451","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-03-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-19T12:20:28+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-19T12:20:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1601,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-19T12:20:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-19T12:20:28+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-19T12:20:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009"},"wordCount":1601,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009","name":"Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-19T12:20:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ragho-sharan-singh-vs-bharat-coking-coal-limited-on-27-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ragho Sharan Singh vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited on 27 March, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/164451","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=164451"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/164451\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=164451"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=164451"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=164451"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}