{"id":174956,"date":"2009-11-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009"},"modified":"2016-03-09T05:50:33","modified_gmt":"2016-03-09T00:20:33","slug":"sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>C.W.P. No. 17587 of 2009                                   1\n\n\n       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n                       CHANDIGARH\n\n\n                                          C.W.P. No. 17587 of 2009\n                               DATE OF DECISION: November 17, 2009\n\n\nSital Dass                                          .........PETITIONER(S)\n\n\n                                 VERSUS\n\n\n\nState of Punjab and Others                          ......RESPONDENT(S)\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA\n\n\nPresent: Mr. M.K. Dogra, Advocate,\n         for the petitioner.\n\n\nAJAI LAMBA, J. (ORAL)\n<\/pre>\n<p>         This order shall dispose of six civil writ petitions namely CWP<\/p>\n<p>No. 17587 of 2009 titled Sital Dass Vs. State of Punjab and Others, CWP<\/p>\n<p>No. 17589 of 2009 titled Jiwa Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Others, CWP<\/p>\n<p>No. 17593 of 2009 titled Jagdish Ram Vs. State of Punjab and Others,<\/p>\n<p>CWP No. 17596 of 2009 titled Ram Lal Vs. State of Punjab and Others,<\/p>\n<p>CWP No. 17601 of 2009 titled Dewan Chand Vs. State of Punjab and<\/p>\n<p>Others, CWP No. 17602 of 2009 titled Ganesh Dass Vs. State of Punjab<\/p>\n<p>and Others, as common questions of facts and law are involved.          For<\/p>\n<p>reference to record, CWP No. 17587 of 2009 titled Sital Dass Vs. State of<\/p>\n<p>Punjab and Others, is being taken up.\n<\/p>\n<p>         This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution<\/p>\n<p>of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> C.W.P. No. 17587 of 2009                                      2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>order Annexure P-5 dated 07.01.2008 and         order     Annexure P-6 dated<\/p>\n<p>18.01.2008. Prayer is for quashing refixation of pay and reduction in basic<\/p>\n<p>pay as also resultant recovery. Learned counsel contends that the case is<\/p>\n<p>covered by decision of this Court dated 27.05.2009 rendered in CWP No.<\/p>\n<p>5568 of 2008, Charan Dass and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Others.<\/p>\n<p>          Issue notice of motion.\n<\/p>\n<p>          On the asking of the Court, Sh. B.S. Chahal, DAG, Punjab,<\/p>\n<p>accepts notice.\n<\/p>\n<p>          Heard.\n<\/p>\n<p>          It has been pleaded that the petitioner was working as a Fitter on<\/p>\n<p>Ranjit Sagar Dam, Shahpur Kandi Township, Pathankot. The petitioner<\/p>\n<p>retired on 28.02.2006 on attaining the age of superannuation. It has been<\/p>\n<p>pleaded that the petitioner alongwith other employees had to work under<\/p>\n<p>tough and hazardous conditions including putting life in danger. About 300<\/p>\n<p>employees working on the project lost their lives in view of the tough<\/p>\n<p>working conditions. Extra effort had to be put in for early completion of the<\/p>\n<p>project. Considering the facts and circumstances, 5 special increments and<\/p>\n<p>5 retrenchee increments were granted to the petitioner.<\/p>\n<p>          Services of the petitioner was regularized, since he had initially<\/p>\n<p>been inducted in service on work charge basis. Pay of the petitioner was<\/p>\n<p>fixed after protecting the last pay drawn as work charge employee.<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently, a Committee was constituted to consider the fixation of pay.<\/p>\n<p>It was recommended that the special increments granted earlier be not<\/p>\n<p>withdrawn and pay merged in the pay.         Report of the Committee was<\/p>\n<p>accepted by respondent no. 2 i.e. Chief Engineer, Irrigation Works, Punjab,<\/p>\n<p>Ranjit Sagar Dam, Shahpur           Kandi Township, Pathankot.     Necessary<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> C.W.P. No. 17587 of 2009                                      3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>instructions were also issued in this regard.\n<\/p>\n<p>           Subsequently, objection was raised that special increments cannot<\/p>\n<p>be granted to the petitioner as the same are not permissible under Punjab<\/p>\n<p>Civil Service Rules.     It was    further pointed out that sanction of the<\/p>\n<p>Government was not obtained before grant of increments. Response to the<\/p>\n<p>objection was given by the Chief Engineer.\n<\/p>\n<p>           Be that as it may, vide impugned order Annexure P-5 dated<\/p>\n<p>07.01.2008, direction has been issued to fix the pay of the petitioner after<\/p>\n<p>withdrawing special increments. In pursuance to Annexure P-6, all the<\/p>\n<p>Executive Engineers vide order dated 18.01.2008 have been asked to refix<\/p>\n<p>the pay.   Accordingly, recovery from the retiral benefits of the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>has been effected.\n<\/p>\n<p>           Learned counsel states that this issue was raised before this Court<\/p>\n<p>in Charan Dass&#8217;s case (supra)<\/p>\n<p>           Learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that indeed the<\/p>\n<p>matter would be covered by judgment rendered in Charan Dass case (supra).<\/p>\n<p>           The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment reads as under:-<\/p>\n<p>                     &#8220;It is admitted case of the parties that the work<\/p>\n<p>           charge period is to be counted as qualifying period for the<\/p>\n<p>           grant of pensionary benefits and thus the emoluments drawn<\/p>\n<p>           by the employee as work charge employee had to be<\/p>\n<p>           considered as also the period when the employee served in<\/p>\n<p>           work charge capacity. It is admitted case of the parties that the<\/p>\n<p>           benefit of retrenchment increments and special increments was<\/p>\n<p>           granted to the employees during the period they were serving<\/p>\n<p>           in work charge capacity without any misrepresentation or<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> C.W.P. No. 17587 of 2009                                  4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>        fraud on their part. The benefit allowed to the petitioners is,<\/p>\n<p>        however, sought to be withdrawn after take over and<\/p>\n<p>        regularisation by the State Government with effect from<\/p>\n<p>        13.3.1996. The retrenchment increments were allowed to bring<\/p>\n<p>        their salary and emoluments at par with other employees in<\/p>\n<p>        the revised pay scale, keeping in view their last drawn salary<\/p>\n<p>        as retrenchees. No reasons have been given in the reply as to<\/p>\n<p>        how such benefit is impermissible or illegal. The          State,<\/p>\n<p>        however, has attempted       to justify its action regarding<\/p>\n<p>        withdrawal    of   special   and   retrenchment       increments.<\/p>\n<p>        Admittedly, special increments were granted from time to time<\/p>\n<p>        to some of the employees\/petitioners for their alleged good<\/p>\n<p>        work. There was no uniform policy and benefit of special<\/p>\n<p>        increments was given on selective basis. In so far as the<\/p>\n<p>        retrenchment increments are concerned, there cannot be any<\/p>\n<p>        second opinion that the benefit was granted to bring their<\/p>\n<p>        wages at par under the revised pay scale and that too before<\/p>\n<p>        their take over by the State Government.\n<\/p>\n<p>                 As regards the grant of special increments is<\/p>\n<p>        concerned, it was selectively granted from person to person<\/p>\n<p>        and is not justified. However, one fact remains common in<\/p>\n<p>        regard to grant of      both the benefits i.e. retrenchment<\/p>\n<p>        increments and special increments that the said benefits were<\/p>\n<p>        conferred upon the petitioners without any misrepresentation<\/p>\n<p>        or fraud on their part. The issue is squarely covered by the<\/p>\n<p>        Full Bench judgment of this Court passed in CWP No.2799 of<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> C.W.P. No. 17587 of 2009                                  5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>        2008 alongwith other connected matters <a href=\"\/doc\/1434376\/\">(Budh Ram and<\/p>\n<p>        others vs. State of Haryana and others<\/a>) decided on 22.5.2009.<\/p>\n<p>        The case of the petitioners falls in category ii) wherein<\/p>\n<p>        following observations have been made:-\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                   &#8220;It is in the light of the above pronouncement, no<br \/>\n                  longer open to the authorities granting the benefits,<br \/>\n                  no matter erroneously, to contend that even when<br \/>\n                  the employee concerned was not at fault and was not<br \/>\n                  in any way responsible for the mistake committed by<br \/>\n                  the authorities, they are entitled to recover the<br \/>\n                  benefit that has been received by the employee on<br \/>\n                  the basis of any such erroneous grant. We say so<br \/>\n                  primarily because if the employee is not responsible<br \/>\n                  for the erroneous grant of benefit to him\/her, it<br \/>\n                  would induce in him the belief that the same was<br \/>\n                  indeed due and payable. Acting on that belief the<br \/>\n                  employee would, as any other person placed in his<br \/>\n                  position arrange his affairs accordingly which he<br \/>\n                  may not have done if he had known that the benefit<br \/>\n                  being granted to him is likely to be withdrawn at any<br \/>\n                  subsequent point of time on what may be then said to<br \/>\n                  be the correct interpretation and application of<br \/>\n                  rules. Having induced that belief in the employee<br \/>\n                  and made him change his position and arrange his<br \/>\n                  affairs in a manner that he would not otherwise have<br \/>\n                  done, it would be unfair, inequitable and harsh for<br \/>\n                  the Government to direct recovery of the excess<br \/>\n                  amount simply because on a true and correct<br \/>\n                  interpretation of the rules, such a benefit was not<br \/>\n                  due&#8230;&#8230;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                  We have, therefore, no hesitation in holding that in<br \/>\n                  case the employees who are recipient of the benefits<br \/>\n                  extended to them on an erroneous interpretation or<br \/>\n                  application of any rule, regulation, circular and<br \/>\n                  instructions have not in any way contributed to such<br \/>\n                  erroneous interpretation nor have they committed<br \/>\n                  any fraud, misrepresentation, deception to obtain<br \/>\n                  the grant of such benefit, the benefit so extended<br \/>\n                  may be stopped for the future, but the amount<br \/>\n                  already paid to the employees cannot be recovered<br \/>\n                  from them&#8230;.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>                  In view of the above, the respondents are not entitled<\/p>\n<p>        to effect any recovery from the petitioners either on account of<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> C.W.P. No. 17587 of 2009                                      6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>          retrenchment increments or special increments allegedly<\/p>\n<p>          erroneously given. However, the respondents are entitled to<\/p>\n<p>          re-fix the emoluments by reducing the special increment only.<\/p>\n<p>          Consequently the pay of the petitioners will be re-fixed and in<\/p>\n<p>          case of those employees who have already retired from<\/p>\n<p>          service, the retiral benefits shall be released within a period of<\/p>\n<p>          two months. The petitioners shall also be entitled to interest on<\/p>\n<p>          the delayed payment of pension\/retiral benefits at the statutory<\/p>\n<p>          rate wherever admissible and at the rate of 6% on pension<\/p>\n<p>          and other retiral benefits where statutory interest is not<\/p>\n<p>          provided for. Any amount deducted from the retiral benefits<\/p>\n<p>          or the salary of the petitioners shall be refunded within the<\/p>\n<p>          aforesaid period.\n<\/p>\n<p>                    Ordered accordingly. Disposed of.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>          In view of the stand of the respondents that the issue is covered by<\/p>\n<p>Charan Dass case (supra), this petition is allowed in terms and to the extent<\/p>\n<p>of decision rendered by this Court in CWP No. 5568 of 2008, Charan Dass<\/p>\n<p>and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Others dated 27.05.2009.<\/p>\n<pre>17.11.2009                                                  (AJAI LAMBA)\nshivani                                                         JUDGE\n\n\n1. To be referred to the reporters or not?\n<\/pre>\n<p>2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> C.W.P. No. 17587 of 2009   7<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab-Haryana High Court Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 2009 C.W.P. No. 17587 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 17587 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: November 17, 2009 Sital Dass &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and Others &#8230;&#8230;RESPONDENT(S) CORAM: HON&#8217;BLE MR. [&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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-174956","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 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\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-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=\"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-03-09T00:20:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"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\\\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-09T00:20:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1481,\"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\\\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-09T00:20:33+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/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":"Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 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\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-03-09T00:20:33+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-09T00:20:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009"},"wordCount":1481,"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\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009","name":"Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-09T00:20:33+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sital-dass-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-17-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sital Dass vs State Of Punjab And Others on 17 November, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/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\/174956","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=174956"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/174956\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=174956"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=174956"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=174956"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}