{"id":209396,"date":"2002-09-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-09-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002"},"modified":"2017-09-10T12:12:45","modified_gmt":"2017-09-10T06:42:45","slug":"union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002","title":{"rendered":"Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Delhi High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A Sikri<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S Sinha, A Sikri<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p> A.K. Sikri, J. <\/p>\n<p> 1. Union of India has filed this writ petition<br \/>\nimpugning judgment and order dated 11.7.2001 passed by<br \/>\nCentral Administration Tribunal, Principal Bench, New<br \/>\nDelhi thereby allowing OA. 1486\/98 filed by the<br \/>\nrespondent herein. The facts are in narrow compass<br \/>\nwhich may first be recapitulated.\n<\/p>\n<p> 2. When Doordarshan was initially started as part of<br \/>\nAll India Radio, services of various categories of<br \/>\nemployees were initially taken on contract basis.<br \/>\nThese included Sound Recordists and Lighting<br \/>\nAssistants. They were not given regular pay-scales<br \/>\nwhich were given to their counter-parts in the Film<br \/>\nDivision under the same Ministry, namely, Ministry of<br \/>\nInformation and Broadcasting. They approached Supreme<br \/>\nCourt by filing various Civil Writs, leading case being<br \/>\nfiled CWP.No. 240\/89. These writ petitions were allowed<br \/>\nvide judgment dated 12.4.90 which is reported as<br \/>\n Y.K. Mehta and Ors. v. Union of India and Anr.<br \/>\n. The Supreme Court found that<br \/>\nalthough these persons were initially appointed on<br \/>\ncontract basis subsequently the Staff Artistes were<br \/>\nbeing appointed up to the age of 55-60 years on a time<br \/>\nscale like a regular Government servant and indeed,<br \/>\nthey possessed all the criteria of a Government<br \/>\nservant. Relying upon its earlier judgment in the case<br \/>\nof  <a href=\"\/doc\/593557\/\">Union of India v. M.A. Chowdhary  the Court<\/a> had held that Staff Artistes of All<br \/>\nIndia Radio were holding civil posts under the<br \/>\nGovernment, it held that there was no distinction<br \/>\nbetween the Staff Artistes of All India Radio and those<br \/>\nin the Doordarshan. Thus the Court declared these<br \/>\nStaff Artistes of Doordarshan as Government Servants.<br \/>\nThe Court also concluded that they were performing the<br \/>\nsame duties as performed by their counter-parts in the<br \/>\nFilm Division and, therefore, they were entitled to the<br \/>\nsame scales of pay as their counter-parts in the Film<br \/>\nDivision.\n<\/p>\n<p> 3. After this judgment Government passed order dated<br \/>\n11.5.88 giving the benefit of pay-scale of Rs. 550-900<br \/>\nto the Sound Recordists in Doordarshan.\n<\/p>\n<p> 4. One Shri A. Rajashekharan who was Senior Engineering<br \/>\nAssistant in Doordarshan Kendra, Madras filed OA. 654\/89<br \/>\nbefore Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench<br \/>\nfor revision of pay-scale of the post of Engineering<br \/>\nAssistant from 425-700 to Rs. 550-900 w.e.f 1.1.78 the<br \/>\ndate from which the Supreme Court had allowed the<br \/>\nrevision of pay-scales of Sound Recordists in the<br \/>\naforesaid judgment. He further demanded that on that<br \/>\nbasis he should be allowed corresponding scale of<br \/>\nRs. 2000-3200 as per 4th Pay Commission&#8217;s<br \/>\nrecommendations with effect from 1.1.86. He founded<br \/>\nhis case on the premise that Engineering Assistants and<br \/>\nSound Recordists in Doordarshan were in the same scale<br \/>\nof Rs. 425-750 w.e.f 1.1.73 as per 3rd Pay<br \/>\nCommission&#8217;s recommendations but Sound Recordists in<br \/>\nFilms Division had been given higher scale of<br \/>\nRs. 550-900. This OA was allowed by the Madras Bench of<br \/>\nthe Tribunal vide order dated 29.6.90 with the<br \/>\ndirection to extend the benefit of the order dated<br \/>\n21.12.88 to Engineering Assistant. The Union of India<br \/>\nfiled SLP against the aforesaid judgment of Madras<br \/>\nBench which was dismissed on 17.1.91. Still<br \/>\ndissatisfied, it filed Review Application which too met<br \/>\nthe same fate and was dismissed by order dated<br \/>\n16.7.1991. Thereafter the petitioners herein<br \/>\napproached Madras Bench again and filed Review<br \/>\nApplication No. 4\/92 seeking review of its judgment<br \/>\ndated 29.6.90 in OA. 654\/89 which was allowed by Madras<br \/>\nBench vide order dated 10.6.92. It was now the turn of<br \/>\nShri Rajashekharan to knock the Apex Court. He filed<br \/>\nSLP (C) No. 4307-08\/93 and No. 15205-07\/92 against the<br \/>\norders of the Madras Bench dated 10.6.92. Supreme<br \/>\nCourt granted SLP and allowed the appeals vide order<br \/>\ndated 25.11.94 thereby setting aside the order dated<br \/>\n10.6.92 of the Madras Bench. As a sequator, the<br \/>\nearlier order dated 29.6.90 of the Madras Bench stood<br \/>\nrestored which had given the benefit of pay-scale of<br \/>\nRs. 550-900 to the Engineering Assistants in Doordarshan<br \/>\nKendra, Madras from 1.1.78. Now the petitioners herein<br \/>\nimplemented Supreme Court Order dated 25.11.1984 by<br \/>\nissuing OM dated 15.5.1995 revising the pay of<br \/>\nEngineering Assistants to Rs. 550-900 from 1.1.78 and<br \/>\nRs. 2000-3200 w.e.f. 1.1.86. The respondents herein<br \/>\nare also Engineering Assistants. However, even when<br \/>\nsuch large number of Engineering Assistants like the<br \/>\nrespondents who had been working as such from dates<br \/>\nmuch earlier than 1.1.78 were not given weightage of<br \/>\nservice already put in prior to 1.1.78. Irrespective<br \/>\nof their dates of appointments their sale of<br \/>\nRs. 550-900 was started as on 1.1.78 without giving<br \/>\nweightage of their earlier service rendered by them.<br \/>\nThese petitioners accordingly filed OA. 1486\/98 seeking<br \/>\nbenefit of OA.654\/89 decided by Madras Bench which was<br \/>\nupheld by the Supreme Court, as noted above. The<br \/>\nTribunal has allowed this application directing the<br \/>\npetitioners herein to give the benefit of earlier<br \/>\nservice as has been done in the case of Sound<br \/>\nRecordists vide para-3 of the petitioners Circular<br \/>\ndated 17.7.90 together with consequential benefits,<br \/>\nincluding fitment in the revised pay scales consequent<br \/>\nto the recommendation of the 5th Pay Commission as well<br \/>\nas payment of arrears, which shall be limited to para 3<br \/>\nof the aforesaid circular dated 17.7.90. Against this<br \/>\nimpugned judgment dated 11.7.2001 present writ petition<br \/>\nis preferred and the sole contention of the petitioners<br \/>\nwas that while allowing aforesaid directions the<br \/>\nTribunal ignored its own judgment i.e. of Principal<br \/>\nBench rendered in OA. 3\/96 decided on 11.10.99.\n<\/p>\n<p> 5. OA.3\/96 was filed by the Association of Radio and<br \/>\nT.V. Engineering Employees (Recognised) which was<br \/>\nregistered association of Engineering Assistants,<br \/>\nSenior engineering Assistants and assistant Engineers<br \/>\nof Radio and Television Engineering Staff, Ministry of<br \/>\nInformation and Broadcasting. The grievance made in<br \/>\nthe said OA was identical to the present case, namely,<br \/>\nthe Association on behalf of its members had claimed<br \/>\nweightage of service already put in by them prior to<br \/>\n1.1.78 which had not been taken into consideration for<br \/>\nfixing the pay and giving annual increments for the<br \/>\nsaid period while placing them in the pay scale of<br \/>\nRs. 550-900 w.e.f. 1.1.78. This benefit of weightage<br \/>\nwas claimed on the basis of para 3 of OM dated 17.7.90<br \/>\nissued by the petitioners herein in respect of<br \/>\nCameramen and Sound Recordists. The Tribunal also<br \/>\nnoted the judgment of Madras Bench. In fact this<br \/>\njudgment was referred to by the Government in its<br \/>\ncounter-affidavit on the basis of which it was<br \/>\nsubmitted that the Engineering Assistants were also<br \/>\ngiven the same benefit w.e.f. 1.1.78 as was given to<br \/>\nSound Recordists by the Supreme Court in Y.K. Mehta&#8217;s<br \/>\ncase (supra). The Tribunal dealt with the judgment of<br \/>\nthe Madras Bench by observing as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>  &#8220;6. Perusal of the letter dated 23.5.95<br \/>\n(Annexure A-1) by which the pay scales of<br \/>\nthe members of the applicants association<br \/>\nwere revised in pursuance of the judgment<br \/>\nof the Supreme Court dated 25.11.94<br \/>\nupholding the C.A.T., Madras Bench<br \/>\ndecision in OA-654\/89 dated 29.6.90,<br \/>\nindicates that the benefit of new pay<br \/>\nscales have been granted to the<br \/>\nengineering assistants w.e.f. 1.1.78 and<br \/>\n1.1.86. It is not in dispute that the<br \/>\nMadras Bench of CAT granted the revised<br \/>\npay scale from the aforesaid dates. It<br \/>\nhas also been mentioned in this letter<br \/>\nthat the engineering assistants who held<br \/>\nand are holding the grades during the<br \/>\nrespective period, are entitled to the<br \/>\nbenefit of scale of pay as a result of<br \/>\nthis revision and refixation from the<br \/>\naforesaid dates i.e. 1.1.78 and 1.1.86&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p> 6. Although in para-7, the Tribunal noted that the<br \/>\napplicants in para-4.19 of the said OA made vague<br \/>\naverments it also noted that besides it had not been<br \/>\nstated as to why such Engineering Assistants who are<br \/>\nworking prior to 1.1.78 are entitled for weightage of<br \/>\nservice when no such direction has been given either by<br \/>\nthe Madras Bench of the Tribunal or by the Supreme<br \/>\nCourt in their respective judgments. Further in para-9<br \/>\nthe Tribunal concluded that there did not appear to be<br \/>\nany reason to give the benefit of revised pay scales to<br \/>\nsuch members prior to the aforesaid dates. (i.e.<br \/>\n1.1.78 and 1.1.86 on the basis of length of services<br \/>\nrendered by them prior to the aforesaid dates). The<br \/>\ncategorical findings, therefore, of the Tribunal were<br \/>\nthat such benefit was not to be extended as it was<br \/>\nneither given by the Madras Bench of the Tribunal or by<br \/>\nthe Supreme Court nor was their any reason to extend<br \/>\nthe benefit of weightage of service prior to 1.1.78.\n<\/p>\n<p> 7. May be the Tribunal mentioned in the opening<br \/>\nportion of para-7 that averments made by the applicants<br \/>\nin para 4.19 of the OA were vague. May be the Tribunal<br \/>\nalso in the last portion of para-9 of its judgment<br \/>\nobserved that if there was any mistake in fixation of<br \/>\ntheir pay in terms of relevant rules in respect of any<br \/>\nmember of the association, such a person could approach<br \/>\nthe Tribunal with specific material and details for<br \/>\nredressal of such grievance. However, this liberty was<br \/>\ngiven only if there was any mistake in fixation of<br \/>\ntheir pay in terms of relevant rules. Insofar as<br \/>\nquestion of giving prior weightage of service prior to<br \/>\n1.1.78 is concerned, the Tribunal did not find any<br \/>\nmerit while deciding OM.3\/96 by order dated 11.10.99<br \/>\nand, therefore, dismissed the said OA.\n<\/p>\n<p> 8. In the judgment which is impugned in this writ<br \/>\npetition, the Tribunal has merely rested its decision<br \/>\non the order dated 29.6.1990 of the Madras Bench of<br \/>\nCentral Administrative Tribunal for giving the<br \/>\nrespondents herein the weightage of the service prior<br \/>\nto 1.1.78 for fixing the pay in the pay-scale of<br \/>\nRs. 550-900, although in the earlier judgment of the<br \/>\nsame Bench it was held that the Madras Bench did not<br \/>\nconfer any such benefit, namely, weightage of past<br \/>\nservice.\n<\/p>\n<p> 9. It is now trite law that a Coordinate Bench of the<br \/>\nTribunal cannot take a view contrary to a view<br \/>\nexpressed by earlier Bench. It is bound by the<br \/>\njudgment of the Coordinate Bench rendered earlier. In<br \/>\ncase it differs from the decision of the earlier Bench,<br \/>\nthe only course open to it to is to refer the matter to<br \/>\na Larger Bench. This was not done. In fact there is<br \/>\nno discussion even about the judgment dated 11.10.99<br \/>\npassed by the Coordinate Bench of the Principal Bench<br \/>\nin OA.3\/96. Significantly in the judgment dated<br \/>\n11.10.99 the earlier Bench took cognizance of the<br \/>\njudgment of Madras Bench as upheld by the Supreme<br \/>\nCourt, but stated that apart from giving benefit of<br \/>\npay-scale of Rs. 550-900 w.e.f 1.1.78, no such<br \/>\nweightage of service rendered prior to 1.1.78 was given<br \/>\nby the Madras Bench of the Central Administrative<br \/>\nTribunal or the Supreme Court.\n<\/p>\n<p> 10. In view thereof, we have no option but to<br \/>\nset-aside the impugned judgment and remit the case back<br \/>\nto the Tribunal with direction to have fresh look into<br \/>\nthe matter keeping in view its earlier judgment in<br \/>\nOA.3\/96 dated 11.10.99 and in case there is still<br \/>\ndifference of opinion then to refer the matter to a<br \/>\nLarger Bench for appropriate decision.\n<\/p>\n<p> 11. This writ is allowed in the aforesaid terms.<br \/>\nThere shall be no orders as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Delhi High Court Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002 Author: A Sikri Bench: S Sinha, A Sikri JUDGMENT A.K. Sikri, J. 1. Union of India has filed this writ petition impugning judgment and order dated 11.7.2001 passed by Central Administration Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi [&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":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-209396","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002 - 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\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002\" \/>\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=\"2002-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-10T06:42:45+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-10T06:42:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002\"},\"wordCount\":1823,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002\",\"name\":\"Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-10T06:42:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002\"}]},{\"@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":"Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002 - 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\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-10T06:42:45+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002","datePublished":"2002-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-10T06:42:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002"},"wordCount":1823,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002","name":"Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-10T06:42:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-uoi-and-ors-vs-shri-p-d-sharma-and-ors-on-9-september-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Shri P.D. Sharma And Ors. on 9 September, 2002"}]},{"@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\/209396","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=209396"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/209396\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=209396"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=209396"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=209396"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}