{"id":167997,"date":"2009-07-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009"},"modified":"2016-11-16T18:23:45","modified_gmt":"2016-11-16T12:53:45","slug":"vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 2009<\/div>\n
C.W.P. No.9371 of 2008                                               -1-\n\n     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n                     CHANDIGARH\n\n\n                                           C.W.P. No.9371 of 2008\n                                        Date of decision:21.07.2009.\n\n\nVidya Devi                                                   ...Petitioner\n\n                                 Versus\n\nUnion of India and others                                ...Respondents\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH\n\nPresent:      Mr. Rajeev Anand, Advocate,\n              for the petitioner.\n\n              Mr. R.K.Chugh, Advocate,\n              for respondent Nos.1 and 2.\n\n              Mr. Anil Sharma, Addl. A.G., Punjab,\n              for respondent No.3.\n                                   *****\n<\/pre>\n
JASBIR SINGH, J. (ORAL).\n<\/p>\n
              This writ petition has been field by widow of a freedom<\/p>\n
fighter namely Shri Bant Ram, to quash order dated 23.08.2006 (P-9),<\/p>\n
vide which restoration of freedom fighter’s pension was declined to her.<\/p>\n
              It is apparent from the records that under Freedom Fighters<\/p>\n
Pension Scheme, 1972, provisional pension was sanctioned in favour of<\/p>\n
Shri Bant Ram on 15.01.1975 (P-3). That order was passed by taking<\/p>\n
note of two certificates, dated 16.12.1973 and 29.03.1974 (P-1 & P-2),<\/p>\n
issued by Ex.MLAs namely, Pt. Bishan Nath and Shri Surrendra Nath<\/p>\n
Khosla.      In these certificates, it was specifically mentioned that<\/p>\n
Shri Bant Ram had actively participated in `Quit India Movement’ in<\/p>\n
1942.      He was arrested at Lahore for the same.         He remained<\/p>\n
imprisoned with them for about 8 months. Thereafter, it appears that<\/p>\n
payment of freedom fighter pension was stopped on 13.04.1976 (P-4).
\n C.W.P. No.9371 of 2008                                                   -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
            The Union of India, floated `Swantantrat Sainik Samman<\/p>\n
Pension Scheme, 1980′. Shri Bant Ram staked his claim to get pension<\/p>\n
under this Scheme also.      His case was recommended by the State<\/p>\n
Government, vide letter dated 03.07.1984 (P-6). In the meantime, Shri<\/p>\n
Bant Ram died on 25.06.1986. Thereafter, the petitioner (widow), who<\/p>\n
was dependent upon Shri Bant Ram, started her efforts to get pension,<\/p>\n
permissible under the Scheme mentioned above. She came to this<\/p>\n
Court, by filing CWP No.13482 of 2006, which was disposed of on<\/p>\n
14.12.2008, by passing the following order : –\n<\/p>\n
                   “Along with written statement filed by respondent<\/p>\n
            No.1 a copy of the order dated August 23, 2006 has been<\/p>\n
            appended, whereby the claim of the petitioner for grant of<\/p>\n
            pension under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension<\/p>\n
            Scheme has been rejected.<\/p>\n
                   The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the<\/p>\n
            present writ petition be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty<\/p>\n
            to the petitioner to challenge the aforesaid order Annexure<\/p>\n
            P-1, in accordance with law.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                          Dismissed   as   withdrawn    with   liberty    as\n\n            aforesaid.\"\n\n<\/pre>\n
            She has filed this writ petition to lay challenge to the order<\/p>\n
dated 23.08.2006 (P-9), vide which her claim to get pension under the<\/p>\n
aforementioned scheme was rejected. To decline claim of the petitioner<\/p>\n
in the impugned order, it was stated as follows: –<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
             “i)   Your client has failed to produce any primary<\/p>\n
                   evidence in support of his claimed suffering.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
             ii)   Your client has failed to produce a Non-Availability of<\/p>\n
                   Record Certificate (NARC) from the concerned
\n C.W.P. No.9371 of 2008                                               -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
                   authority, which is a pre-requisite for secondary<\/p>\n
                   evidence to the considered, where the records of the<\/p>\n
                   relevant period are not available.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            iii)   Notwithstanding the above, he co-prisoner certificate<\/p>\n
                   issued by one Shri Puran Chand, was found to be<\/p>\n
                   unacceptable, as his own suffering was less than the<\/p>\n
                   minimum period of 1 years, as required under the<\/p>\n
                   provision of the pension scheme.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            iv)    Since then, no certificates\/documents have ever<\/p>\n
                   been received from Shri Bant Singh\/Smt. Vidya Devi,<\/p>\n
                   nor from the State Government.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            v)     He has failed to submit any acceptable evidentiary<\/p>\n
                   evidence in support of his claimed participation in the<\/p>\n
                   freedom struggle, as required under the provisions of<\/p>\n
                   the Samman Pension Scheme.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\n<\/blockquote>\n
            Counsel for the petitioner states that once case of the<\/p>\n
petitioner has been recommended by the State Government, the<\/p>\n
authorities were not justified to say that she was not eligible to get<\/p>\n
pension, as per the Scheme. He has specifically stated that earlier,<\/p>\n
when application was moved by Shri Bant Ram to get pension, two<\/p>\n
certificates issued by Ex.MLAs were put on record.        When second<\/p>\n
application was moved, similar certificates were again put on record,<\/p>\n
one by Puran Chand and second by Som Parkash, who suffered<\/p>\n
imprisonment with her husband.        By referring to above said fact,<\/p>\n
counsel for the petitioner states that there was sufficient compliance to<\/p>\n
the provisions of the Scheme.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            It is necessary to mention here that as per Scheme of<\/p>\n
1980, claim to get pension can be staked only by producing primary
\n C.W.P. No.9371 of 2008                                               -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
evidence or secondary evidence. In the Scheme, secondary evidence<\/p>\n
has been defined as under:-\n<\/p>\n
             “Secondary evidence: In case records of the relevant<\/p>\n
             period are not available, secondary evidence in the form of<\/p>\n
             2 co-prisoner’s certificates (CPC) from freedom fighters<\/p>\n
             who have proven jail suffering of a minimum 1 year and<\/p>\n
             who were with the applicant in the jail could be considered<\/p>\n
             provided        the   State   Government\/Union      Territory<\/p>\n
             Administration concerned, after due verification of the claim<\/p>\n
             and its genuineness certifies that documentary evidence<\/p>\n
             from official records in support of the claimed suffering are<\/p>\n
             not available. In case the certifier happens to be a sitting<\/p>\n
             or ex-MP or ex-MLA, only one certificate in place of the two<\/p>\n
             is required.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            It is further mandated that the State Government is required<\/p>\n
to give a certificate, after verifying the documents, that the relevant<\/p>\n
record, to support the evidence, is not available.<\/p>\n
            It is apparent from the record that the case for grant of<\/p>\n
pension to the petitioner was recommended by the State Government,<\/p>\n
vide letter dated 03.07.1984, by taking note of affidavit of Shri Bant Ram<\/p>\n
and certificates issued by his co-prisoners. At that relevant time, when<\/p>\n
recommendation was made, it was incumbent upon the State<\/p>\n
Government to further certify that the record, to support claim put up by<\/p>\n
Shri Bant Ram and regarding facts mentioned in the certificates, of his<\/p>\n
co-prisoners, was not available, but that was not done, which resulted<\/p>\n
into passing of order Annexure P-9. Certificates, earlier issued by two<\/p>\n
Ex.MLAs, when provisional pension was granted in favour of Shri Bant<\/p>\n
Ram, and two more certificates annexed with the second application,
\n C.W.P. No.9371 of 2008                                                -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
were available with the State Government. Under these circumstances,<\/p>\n
it was necessary for the State Government to verify the facts regarding<\/p>\n
non availability of the record also, as envisaged under the Scheme.<\/p>\n
The officers concerned have failed to act properly, which has dragged<\/p>\n
the petitioner into litigation for the last so many years.<\/p>\n
             In view of facts mentioned above, this writ petition is partly<\/p>\n
allowed. Order Annexure P-9 is set aside and directions are issued to<\/p>\n
the State Government of Punjab to take note of two certificates put on<\/p>\n
record by Shri Bant Ram (P-1 and P-2), when provisional pension was<\/p>\n
granted to him and two more certificates which were brought on record,<\/p>\n
when second application was moved and then, after verifying a fact that<\/p>\n
the record is not available, as is necessary under the Scheme,<\/p>\n
recommend case of the petitioner to the Central Government for<\/p>\n
sanction of pension. On receipt of recommendation, the respondent<\/p>\n
Nos.1 and 2 are directed to sanction pension to the petitioner, as per<\/p>\n
Scheme. Arrears be also paid.\n<\/p>\n
             Counsel for the petitioner is directed to supply photocopies<\/p>\n
of all the four certificates, already furnished to respondent No.3, to<\/p>\n
process her case. Respondent No.3 is directed to do the needful, within<\/p>\n
a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.<\/p>\n
             Disposed of.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\nJuly 21, 2009.                                       ( JASBIR SINGH )\nvinod                                                        JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 2009 C.W.P. No.9371 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.9371 of 2008 Date of decision:21.07.2009. Vidya Devi …Petitioner Versus Union of India and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH Present: Mr. […]<\/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-167997","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 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\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-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=\"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-16T12:53:45+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-16T12:53:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1157,\"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\\\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009\",\"name\":\"Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-16T12:53:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 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":"Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 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\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-16T12:53:45+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-16T12:53:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009"},"wordCount":1157,"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\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009","name":"Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-16T12:53:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-union-of-india-and-others-on-21-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vidya Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 21 July, 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\/167997","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=167997"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167997\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=167997"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=167997"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=167997"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}