{"id":207384,"date":"2010-04-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010"},"modified":"2015-09-20T14:38:06","modified_gmt":"2015-09-20T09:08:06","slug":"nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI\n             W.P.(S) No. 6324 of 2009\nNandi Bala Kumari                             ......Petitioner\n                            Versus\n1. The State of Jharkhand\n2. Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi\n3. District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi......Respondents\n                          ---------\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. PATEL\n                         ---------\nFor the Petitioner            : M\/s A.K.Sahani &amp; Ajit Kumar, Advocates\nFor the State                 : Mr. Binoda Nand Tiwary, J.C. to G.P.-II\n                         ---------\n              th\n03\/ Dated: 8 April, 2010\n\n1.           Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that neither the\npetitioner has been given compassionate appointment by the respondents\nnor the respondents have paid her the family pension and, therefore, the\npresent writ petition has been preferred.\n2.           Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the father of\nthe petitioner has expired on 5th May, 1986 and at the relevant date, the age\nof the petitioner was six years and, therefore, the petitioner applied for\ncompassionate appointment, only upon attaining the age of majority, but,\nthe respondents are not appointing the petitioner on compassionate ground.\nThe petitioner's mother has expired in the year, 2003 and, thereafter, the\nrespondents have stopped the payment of family pension, as stated in\nparagraph no.11 of the writ petition and, therefore, let a suitable direction\nbe given to the respondents for compassionate appointment as well as for\npayment of family pension to the petitioner.\n3.           I have heard learned counsel for the respondents, who has\nsubmitted that the father of the petitioner has expired on 5th May, 1986.\nMore than a period of two decade having lapsed, the purpose of\ncompassionate appointment is already over, as the petitioner has survived\nfor approximately twenty three years after the death of her father. Learned\ncounsel for the respondents has relied upon the decisions, rendered by the\nHon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of <a href=\"\/doc\/1572559\/\">State of U.P. V. Paras Nath,<\/a> as\nreported in (1998)2 SCC page-412, Sanjay Kumar V. State of Bihar &amp;\nanr., as reported in (2000)7 SCC page-192, Santosh Kumar Dubey V.\nState of Uttar Pradesh &amp; anr., as reported in (2009)6 SCC page-481 and\n<a href=\"\/doc\/195133\/\">M\/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd. V. Anil Badyakar &amp; ors.<\/a>, as reported in AIR\n                                          2.\n2009 SC page-2534, and submitted that after a long lapse of time from the\ndate of death of the employee, the surviving legal heir is not entitled for\ncompassionate appointment. There cannot be a reservation of a seat for a\nminor, who has attained the age of majority after several years, as has been\nheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Kumar V. State\nof Bihar &amp; anr., as reported in (2000)7 SCC page-192, at paragraph no.3,\nand, therefore, this writ petition deserves to be dismissed. Learned counsel\nfor the respondents further submitted that so far as pension is concerned, it\nis payable to a retired employee and after the death of the employee, family\npension will be paid to the widow. In the facts of the present case, mother\nof the petitioner has also expired in the year, 2003 and at that time, the\npetitioner was more than 23 years of age and, therefore, this petitioner is\nnot entitled for any pension amount and hence, this writ petition deserves to\nbe dismissed.\n4.             In view of the aforesaid submissions, I see no reason to\nentertain this writ petition, mainly for the following facts and reasons:\n      (i)      It appears from the facts of the case that the father of the\npresent petitioner expired on 5th May, 1986, who was working with the\nrespondents. Petitioner's age was six years, as on the date of death of her\nfather.\n      (ii)     The petitioner attained the age of majority, much later, in the\nyear, 1999 and, thus, after several years, petitioner is claiming\ncompassionate appointment, which is not allowed to be given, otherwise,\nthe very purpose of compassionate appointment will be frustrated.\nPetitioner has survived for several years after the death of her father.\n      (iii)    It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1572559\/\">State of U.P. V. Paras Nath,<\/a> as reported in (1998)2 SCC page-412, at\nparagraph nos. 4, 5 and 6, as under:\n                \"4. Seventeen years after the death of his father, the\n          respondent, on 8.1.1986, made an application for being appointed to\n          the post of a Primary School Teacher under the said Rules. His\n          application was rejected. He, thereafter, filed a writ petition before\n          the High Court. This writ petition was allowed by the High Court\n                                        3.\n       and an appeal from the decision of the Single Judge of the High\n       Court was also dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court.\n       Hence the State has filed the present appeal.\n             5. The purpose of providing employment to a dependent of a\n      Government servant dying in harness in preference to anybody else,\n      is to mitigate the hardship caused to the family of the employee on\n      account of his unexpected death while still in service. To alleviate\n      the distress of the family, such appointments are permissible on\n      compassionate grounds provided there are Rules providing for such\n      appointment. The purpose is to provide immediate financial\n      assistance to the family of a deceased Government servant. None of\n      these considerations can operate when the application is made after a\n      long period of time such as seventeen years in the present case.\n             6. We may, in this connection, refer to only one judgment of\n      this Court in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/43443\/\">Union of India v. Bhagwan Singh. In<\/a> this\n      case, the application for appointment on similar compassionate\n      grounds was made twenty years after the railway servant's death.\n      This Court observed:\n             \"The reason for making compassionate appointment, which is\n      exceptional, is to provide immediate financial assistance to the\n      family of a Government servant who dies in harness, when there is\n      no other earning member in the family.\"\n                                                   (Emphasis supplied)\n            In view of the aforesaid decision, consideration for\n      compassionate appointment cannot operate, when the application is\n      made after a long period of time.\n      (iv) It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of\nSanjay Kumar V. State of Bihar &amp; ors., as reported in (2000)7 SCC\npage-192, at paragraph nos. 2 and 3, as under:\n             \"2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the\n      petitioner has placed strong reliance on the decision of a learned\n      Single Judge of the Patna High Court in Chandra Bhushan v. State\n      of Bihar. Learned Senior Counsel points out that it was held in that\n                                       4.\n      case that an applicant's right cannot be defeated on the ground of\n      delay caused by authorities which was beyond the control of the\n      applicant. Learned Senior Counsel further points out that instead of\n      following the above judgment, the same learned Judge has now held\n      on 21-4-1997 that the application is time-barred. Learned counsel\n      has placed before us a judgment of this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/327850\/\">Director of\n      Education (Secondary) v. Pushpendra Kumar. He<\/a> submits that, in\n      this case, a direction was given to create supernumerary posts.\n            3. We are unable to agree with the submissions of the learned\n      Senior Counsel for the petitioner. This Court has held in a number of\n      cases that compassionate appointment is intended to enable the\n      family of the deceased employee to tide over sudden crisis resulting\n      due to death of the breadearner who had left the family in penury and\n      without any means of livelihood. In fact such a view has been\n      expressed in the very decision cited by the petitioner in <a href=\"\/doc\/327850\/\">Director of\n      Education v. Pushpendra Kumar. It<\/a> is also significant to notice that\n      on the date when the first application was made by the petitioner on\n      2-6-1988<\/pre>\n<p>, the petitioner was a minor and was not eligible for<br \/>\n      appointment. This is conceded by the petitioner. There cannot be<br \/>\n      reservation of a vacancy till such time as the petitioner becomes a<br \/>\n      major after a number of years, unless there are some specific<br \/>\n      provisions. The very basis of compassionate appointment is to see<br \/>\n      that the family gets immediate relief.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                   (Emphasis supplied)<br \/>\n            In view of the aforesaid decision, though the petitioner is<br \/>\n      attaining the age of majority, later on, there cannot be a reservation<br \/>\n      of a vacancy, till such time as the petitioner becomes a major, after a<br \/>\n      number of years and, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for<br \/>\n      compassionate appointment.\n<\/p>\n<p>      (v) It has been held by the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court in the case of<br \/>\nSantosh Kumar Dubey v. State of Uttar Pradesh &amp; ors., as reported in<br \/>\n(2009)6 SCC page-481, especially at paragraph nos.11 and 12, as under:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>            &#8220;11. The very concept of giving a compassionate appointment<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         5.<\/span><br \/>\n      is to tide over the financial difficulties that are faced by the family of<br \/>\n      the deceased due to the death of the earning member of the family.<br \/>\n      There is immediate loss of earning for which the family suffers<br \/>\n      financial hardship. The benefit is given so that the family can tide<br \/>\n      over such financial constrains.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             12. The request for appointment on compassionate grounds<br \/>\n      should be reasonable and proximate to the time of the death of the<br \/>\n      bread earner of the family, inasmuch as the very purpose of giving<br \/>\n      such benefit is to make financial help available to the family to<br \/>\n      overcome sudden economic crisis occurring in the family of the<br \/>\n      deceased who has died in harness. But this, however, cannot be<br \/>\n      another source of recruitment. This also cannot be treated as a<br \/>\n      bonanza and also as a right to get an appointment in government<br \/>\n      service.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                                                    (Emphasis supplied)<br \/>\n             In view of the aforesaid decision also, there is no legal vested<br \/>\n      right for compassionate appointment. After a long lapse of time, no<br \/>\n      compassionate appointment can be given.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      (vi)   It has been held by the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court in the case of<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/195133\/\">M\/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd. v. Anil Badyakar &amp; ors.<\/a>, as reported in A.I.R.<br \/>\n2009 SC page-2534, especially at paragraph no.19, as under:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             &#8220;19. The principles indicated above would give a clear<br \/>\n     indication that the compassionate appointment is not a vested right<br \/>\n     which can be exercised at any time in future. The compassionate<br \/>\n     employment cannot be claimed and offered after a lapse of time and<br \/>\n     after the crisis is over. In the instant case the employee died in<br \/>\n     harness in the year 1981 and after a long squabble by the dependents<br \/>\n     of the deceased, they arrived at a settlement that the son-in-law of the<br \/>\n     second daughter who is unemployed may request for appointment on<br \/>\n     compassionate grounds. The request so made was accepted by the<br \/>\n     Personnel Manager of the Company subject to the approval of the<br \/>\n     Director of the Company. The Director (P), who is the competent<br \/>\n     authority for post facto approval, keeping in view the object and<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                               6.<\/span><br \/>\n             purpose of providing compassionate appointment has cancelled the<br \/>\n             provisional appointment on the ground that nearly after 12 years from<br \/>\n             the date of death of the employee such an appointment could not<br \/>\n             have been offered to the so-called dependent of the deceased<br \/>\n             employee. In our considered view, the decision of the employer was<br \/>\n             in consonance with Umesh Kumar Nagpal&#8217;s case and the same should<br \/>\n             not have been interfered with by the High Court.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                                                            (Emphasis supplied)<br \/>\n                    In view of the aforesaid decision, there is no legal vested right<br \/>\n             for compassionate appointment, especially when much longer period<br \/>\n             has lapsed from the date of death of the employee in harness. In the<br \/>\n             facts of the present case also, father of the petitioner has expired on<br \/>\n             5th May, 1986. Thereafter, more than a period of two decade is over<br \/>\n             and hence, the petitioner is not entitled for compassionate<br \/>\n             appointment.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>       5.    In view of the aforesaid facts, reasons and judicial pronouncements,<br \/>\n       the petitioner is not entitled for compassionate appointment. So far pension<br \/>\n       amount is concerned, the mother of the petitioner has expired in the year,<br \/>\n       2003, as stated in paragraph no.11 of the memo of petition and it is<br \/>\n       submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the age of the<br \/>\n       petitioner, as in the year, 2003, was more than twenty one years. She<br \/>\n       attained the age of majority in the year, 1999, as per paragraph no.10 of the<br \/>\n       writ petition. Thus, the petitioner is also not entitled for any family pension.<br \/>\n       In view of the aforesaid facts, this writ petition is hereby dismissed.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>                                                              (D.N. Patel, J)<br \/>\nA.K.Verma\/\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 6324 of 2009 Nandi Bala Kumari &#8230;&#8230;Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi 3. District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi&#8230;&#8230;Respondents &#8212;&#8212;&#8212; CORAM: HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE D. [&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-207384","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>Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010 - 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\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-20T09:08:06+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-20T09:08:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":785,\"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\\\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010\",\"name\":\"Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-20T09:08:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010 - 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\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-20T09:08:06+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-20T09:08:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010"},"wordCount":785,"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\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010","name":"Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-20T09:08:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nandi-bala-kumari-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nandi Bala Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 8 April, 2010"}]},{"@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\/207384","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=207384"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207384\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=207384"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=207384"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=207384"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}