{"id":232892,"date":"2008-08-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008"},"modified":"2015-10-12T22:51:22","modified_gmt":"2015-10-12T17:21:22","slug":"navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008<\/div>\n
CWP No.14728 OF 2006.                                                1\n\n\n   IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n                     CHANDIGARH.\n\n                                                      CWP No.14728 OF 2006.\n                                                     Date of Decision: 8.8.2008.\n\n\nNavin Chand Thakur\n                                       ............. Petitioner\n                              Versus\n\nState of Punjab and others.\n                                       ..............Respondents.\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH\n       HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH\n\n\nPresent:- Mr.Rajiv Atrma Ram,Senior Advocate with\n          Mr.Gursewak Singh Mann,Advocate for the petitioner.\n          Mr.KS Dadwal,Addl.AG Punjab for the official\n          respondents.\n\n                                  *****\n\nJASWANT SINGH, J.\n<\/pre>\n
          Petitioner, a 91 years old retired teacher, has filed the present writ<\/p>\n
petition for directing the respondents to re-fix his pension in the pay scale of<\/p>\n
Rs.12000-18300 w.e.f. 1.1.1996 and further grant arrears of pension on<\/p>\n
account of said re-fixation alongwith interest @ 18% per annum.<\/p>\n
          Facts in brief are that the petitioner, who was born on 20.2.1917<\/p>\n
joined the Punjab Education Service on 1.11.1943. He was promoted to the<\/p>\n
Punjab Education Service Class II on 1.11.1956. Government of Punjab<\/p>\n
vide its letter dated 24.2.1968 (Annexure P-6) revised the pay scales of<\/p>\n
teaching personnel working in the Government colleges w.e.f. 1.11.1966<\/p>\n
and the petitioner was accordingly given the pay scale of Rs.700-40-1100 as<\/p>\n
a Senior Lecturer.     The petitioner retired as one of the senior most<\/p>\n
Government College Senior Lecturers on 28.2.1975 after rendering almost
\n CWP No.14728 OF 2006.                                              2<\/span><\/p>\n
32 years of meritorious service. The pension of the petitioner was fixed in<\/p>\n
the pay scale of Rs.700-40-1100.\n<\/p>\n
          It is relevant to mention that prior to 1.1.1973 the Lecturers in the<\/p>\n
Government Colleges of Punjab were, on the basis of length of their service,<\/p>\n
re-designated and granted different pay scales as is discernible from a<\/p>\n
reading of Annexure P-6. The pay scale admissible to a Lecturer was<\/p>\n
Rs.300-600, to Lecturer Senior Scale Rs.400-800 and to a Senior Lecturer<\/p>\n
Rs.700-1100 in a hierarchy of three tier category of teaching personnel.<\/p>\n
          The Government of Punjab vide its instructions dated 25.2.1977<\/p>\n
(Annexure P-7),on the recommendations of University Grants Commission,<\/p>\n
revised the pay scales of teaching personnel in the Government Colleges<\/p>\n
w.e.f. 1.1.1973 and provided a common running pay scale of Rs.700-1600<\/p>\n
and the Lecturers, Lecturers Senior Scale as well as Senior Lecturers were<\/p>\n
fitted in the said running scale instead of separate pay scales admissible<\/p>\n
before 1.1.1973. Accordingly, the pension of the petitioner was re-fixed by<\/p>\n
notionally fixing his pay in the pay scale of Rs.700-1600.<\/p>\n
          The Government of Punjab on the pattern of University Grants<\/p>\n
Commission, sanctioned the grant of selection grade of Rs.1200-50-1300-<\/p>\n
60-1840 with effect from 10.10.1983 against 20% posts of total strength of<\/p>\n
Lecturers of Government Colleges and the criterion for such grant was<\/p>\n
possessing of 15 years of service.\n<\/p>\n
          Thereafter the Government of Punjab vide notification dated<\/p>\n
12.1.1988 (Annexure P-8), having regard to the decision of Government of<\/p>\n
India and in pursuance of recommendations of University Grants<\/p>\n
Commission, revised the pay scales of the teaching personnel of<\/p>\n
Universities and Colleges w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and provided as under:-<\/p>\n
\n CWP No.14728 OF 2006.                                                3<\/span>\n\n\n\"(B) GOVERNMENT COLLEGES\n\n   Lecturer\/Assistant              700-1600            2200-75-2800-100-\n       Director                                              4000\n   Lecturer\/Assistant             Not existing         3000-100-3500-125-\n Director (Senior Scale)                                      5000\n   Lecturer\/Assistant             1200-1840            3700-125-4950-150-\n   Director (Selection                                       5700\"\n         Grade)\n\n<\/pre>\n
          It is clear from the reading of the above that the three tier<\/p>\n
classification of posts of Lecturers based on the length of service which<\/p>\n
was existing prior to the issuance of instructions dated 25.2.1977 (Annexure<\/p>\n
P-7) was revived.\n<\/p>\n
          Thereafter, Government vide notification dated 16.1.1998 issued<\/p>\n
Punjab Civil Services (Revised Pay Rules) 1998 re-fixing the pay scales of<\/p>\n
its employees w.e.f. 1.1.1996. As per these rules the pay scales of Lecturers<\/p>\n
were revised to Rs.8000-13500, of Lecturers Senior Scale to Rs.10000-<\/p>\n
15200 and Lecturers Selection Grade to Rs.12000-18300.<\/p>\n
          The Government of Punjab accepted and implemented the<\/p>\n
recommendations of the Fourth Pay Commission in respect of pensionary<\/p>\n
benefits to pre-1.1.1996 pensioners by issuing instructions dated<\/p>\n
21.7.1988\/18.8.1988 (Annexure P-9). As per these instructions for the<\/p>\n
retirees prior to 1.1.1986 it was provided that their pay shall be first fixed on<\/p>\n
notional basis in the revised scale of pay of the post held by them at the time<\/p>\n
of their retirement according to the pay revision rules issued by the<\/p>\n
Government for implementation of the recommendations of the successive<\/p>\n
Pay Commissions and thereafter the updated pension on 1.1.1986 shall be<\/p>\n
50% of this notional pay subject to proportional reduction where qualifying<\/p>\n
service was less than 33 years.\n<\/p>\n
 CWP No.14728 OF 2006.                                             4<\/span><\/p>\n
           The respondent Government in continuation of instructions dated<\/p>\n
21.7.1988\/14.8.1988 issued another instructions dated 25.8.2005 (Annexure<\/p>\n
P-2) whereby it was provided that w.e.f. 1.1.1996 pension of all pensioners<\/p>\n
irrespective of their date of retirement shall not be less than 50% of the<\/p>\n
minimum pay in the revised scale of pay introduced w.e.f. 1.1.1996 of the<\/p>\n
post last held by the pensioners. The said instructions also provided the<\/p>\n
manner in which the pension is to be revised w.e.f. 1.1.1996. Para 5 of the<\/p>\n
same provides the manner in which the pension is to be fixed for the<\/p>\n
pensioner who retired prior to 1.1.1986.\n<\/p>\n
            The petitioner, being a retiree prior to 1.1.1996 submitted his<\/p>\n
application dated 18.10.2005 (Annexure P-3) in the prescribed form<\/p>\n
alongwith necessary documents giving his option for re-fixation of his<\/p>\n
pension.    The respondents re-fixed the pension of the petitioner by<\/p>\n
notionally fixing his pay in the pay scale of Rs.8000-13500 (admissible to a<\/p>\n
Lecturer) w.e.f. 1.1.1996 instead of Rs.12000-18300 (admissible to Lecturer<\/p>\n
Selection Grade) as is being claimed. Hence the present writ petition.<\/p>\n
           Respondents, upon notice, filed their reply and have more or less<\/p>\n
admitted the factual aspects regarding admissibility of the pay scales to the<\/p>\n
posts of Lecturers, Lecturers Senior Scale and Lecturers Selection Grade. It<\/p>\n
has, however, been stated that the         petitioner retired on 28.2.1975 as<\/p>\n
Lecturer in the scale of Rs.700-1600 and not as a Senior Lecturer as is<\/p>\n
asserted because w.e.f. 1.1.1973 all the three previous scales were merged<\/p>\n
into one running scale of Rs.700-1600 with one designation as Lecturer and<\/p>\n
there was no provision of any post of Senior Lecturers. It has been further<\/p>\n
averred that selection grade of Rs.1200-1840 was          introduced for the<\/p>\n
Lecturers against 20% of total posts in Government Colleges w.e.f.
\n CWP No.14728 OF 2006.                                             5<\/span><\/p>\n
10.10.1983 for Lecturers having 15 years of service. It is further averred<\/p>\n
that since the petitioner retired on 28.2.1975 in the pay scale of Rs.700-<\/p>\n
1600, the benefit of notional pay fixation in the selection grade for re-<\/p>\n
fixation of his pension was never\/ cannot be granted to him and, therefore,<\/p>\n
his notional pay w.e.f 1.1.1986 has been rightly fixed to its revised scale of<\/p>\n
Rs.2200-4000 and again in its further revised scale of Rs.8000-13500 w.e.f.<\/p>\n
1.1.1996.\n<\/p>\n
            It appears that during the pendency of the hearing of the present<\/p>\n
writ petition the opinion of the Finance Department,Punjab was sought<\/p>\n
regarding the claim of the petitioner. It was opined that the petitioner was<\/p>\n
not entitled to get his pension re-fixed in the claimed scale of Rs.12000-<\/p>\n
18300 w.e.f. 1.1.1996.\n<\/p>\n
            We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and persued the<\/p>\n
record.\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents<\/p>\n
have mis-interpreted the instructions dated 21.7.1988\/14.8.1988 (Annexure<\/p>\n
P\/9) and 28.5.2005 (Annexure P\/2) and wrongly re-fixed the pension of<\/p>\n
the petitioner by notionally fixing his pay in the scale of Rs.8000-13500, as<\/p>\n
the petitioner on account of his almost 32 years of unblemished service was<\/p>\n
entitled to be notionally fixed in the pay scale of Rs.12000-18300 w.e.f.<\/p>\n
1.1.1996.\n<\/p>\n
            On the other hand learned counsel for the respondents has argued<\/p>\n
that on the date of his retirement the petitioner was drawing the pay scale of<\/p>\n
a Lecturer as per the notification in force and thereafter all his subsequent<\/p>\n
notional fixation of pay have been correctly fixed in the pay scale<\/p>\n
admissible to Lecturers.\n<\/p>\n
 CWP No.14728 OF 2006.                                              6<\/span><\/p>\n
            After giving our thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions,<\/p>\n
we are afraid that we cannot accept the stand of the respondents, which to<\/p>\n
our mind is devoid of any merit.\n<\/p>\n
            It is undisputed that the petitioner on account of his almost 23<\/p>\n
years of unblemished service was granted the pay scale of Rs.700-1100 as<\/p>\n
Senior Lecturer w.e.f. 1.11.1966. At that time there were three categories of<\/p>\n
teaching personnel in the Government Colleges based on the length of<\/p>\n
service i.e. Lecturer in the scale of Rs.300-600, Lecturer Senior Scale in the<\/p>\n
scale of Rs.400-800 and Lecturer Selection Grade in the scale of Rs.700-<\/p>\n
1100. It is also not disputed that the petitioner after rendering almost 32<\/p>\n
years of meritorious service retired on 28.2.1975 from the post of Senior<\/p>\n
Lecturer in the pay scale of Rs.700-1100 and accordingly his pension was<\/p>\n
fixed. Thereafter vide instructions dated 25.2.1977 (Annexure P-7), all the<\/p>\n
three cadres of teaching personnel in the Government Colleges were<\/p>\n
merged into single cadre of Lecturer in the pay scale of Rs.700-1600<\/p>\n
retrospectively w.e.f. 1.1.1973. The pension of the petitioner was<\/p>\n
accordingly re-fixed in the scale of Rs.700-1600.           By no stretch of<\/p>\n
imagination this retrospective merger for the purpose of grant of higher<\/p>\n
pay scale can operate to his disadvantage to mean that the petitioner had<\/p>\n
been demoted to the post of Lecturer, since he had already retired as Senior<\/p>\n
Lecturer.\n<\/p>\n
            It is further undisputed that selection grade of Rs.1200-1840<\/p>\n
w.e.f. 10.10.1983 was granted to the Lecturers. It is also not in dispute that<\/p>\n
the criterion for grant of selection grade to the Lecturers was 15 years of<\/p>\n
service as Lecturer.     Therefore, hypothetically speaking and notionally<\/p>\n
fixing the pay scale of the petitioner it cannot be denied that the petitioner
\n CWP No.14728 OF 2006.                                             7<\/span><\/p>\n
would have been or is entitled to be placed in the selection grade of Lecturer<\/p>\n
and thus be re-designated      as Lecturer Selection Grade (admittedly the<\/p>\n
petitioner had been granted grade of Senior Lecturer after 23 years of<\/p>\n
service).\n<\/p>\n
            It is further undisputed that w.e.f. 1.1.1986 the three tier<\/p>\n
categorisation of teaching personnel was revived with the nomenclature of<\/p>\n
Lecturers, Lecturers Senior Scale and Lecturers Selection Grade (in place of<\/p>\n
earlier designated Senior Lecturers) in the pay scales of Rs.2200-4000,<\/p>\n
3000-5000 and 3700-5700 respectively. It is further admitted that the pay<\/p>\n
scale of Rs.3000-5000 for a Lecturer Senior Scale came into existence w.e.f.<\/p>\n
1.1.1996. Respondents have not been able to explain as to how and on what<\/p>\n
basis all the Lecturers prior to 1.1.1986, who were in the pay scale of<\/p>\n
Rs.700-1600 would have been placed in the revised scale of Rs.2200-4000<\/p>\n
or the newly sanctioned pay scale of Rs.3000-5000. Therefore, to place the<\/p>\n
petitioner notionally in the pay scale of Rs.2200-4000, admissible to a<\/p>\n
Lecturer with minimal length of service in the three tier classification of<\/p>\n
teaching personnel, despite his almost 32 years unblemished service defies<\/p>\n
any reasoning or logic. Hence, in our considered opinion, the action of the<\/p>\n
respondents in notionally placing the petitioner in the pay scale of Rs.2200-<\/p>\n
4000 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 (admissible to a Lecturer at the initial stage of his<\/p>\n
appointment) by ignoring       his length of service   and placement in the<\/p>\n
highest category of teaching personnel at the relevant time i.e. Senior<\/p>\n
Lecturer is grossly unjust and arbitrary. On the same parity of reasoning,<\/p>\n
the placement of the petitioner for the purpose of re-fixing his pension in<\/p>\n
the corresponding scale of Rs.8000-13500 is also arbitrary.<\/p>\n
            Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case we find that
\n CWP No.14728 OF 2006.                                               8<\/span><\/p>\n
the petitioner is entitled to pensionary benefits\/ re-fixation of his pension in<\/p>\n
terms of instructions dated 25.8.2005 (Annexure P-2) by notionally fixing<\/p>\n
his pay in the pay scale of Rs.3700-5700 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and corresponding<\/p>\n
scale of Rs.12000-18300 w.e.f. 1.1.1996 as the post last held by him at the<\/p>\n
time of his retirement was that of a Senior Lecturer, i.e. the highest category<\/p>\n
amongst teaching personnel of Government Colleges, on account of his<\/p>\n
meritorious length of service.\n<\/p>\n
            In view of the above, we allow the writ petition and direct the<\/p>\n
respondents to re-fix the pension of the petitioner in terms of instructions<\/p>\n
dated 25.8.2005 (Annexure P-2) by notionally fixing his pay in the pay scale<\/p>\n
of Rs.3700-5700 w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and corresponding scale of Rs.12000-<\/p>\n
18300 w.e.f. 1.1.1996. Since the qualifying service of the petitioner is less<\/p>\n
than 33 years, he would be granted pro rata pension as provided by the<\/p>\n
instructions dated 25.8.2005 (Annexure P-2).\n<\/p>\n
            The payment of arrears on account of such re-fixation shall be<\/p>\n
restricted to 38 months prior to the filing of the writ petition. The petitioner<\/p>\n
shall, however, be not entitled to any interest on such arrears.<\/p>\n
            The respondents are further directed to do the needful within three<\/p>\n
months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing<\/p>\n
which the petitioner shall be entitled to interest @ 12% on such arrears from<\/p>\n
the date they became due till the date of realisation.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n                                               (Jaswant Singh)\n                                                    Judge\n\n\n8.8.2008.                                        (Jasbir Singh)\njoshi                                                Judge\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008 CWP No.14728 OF 2006. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.14728 OF 2006. Date of Decision: 8.8.2008. Navin Chand Thakur …………. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others. …………..Respondents. CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JASBIR […]<\/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-232892","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nNavin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008 - 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\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-10-12T17:21:22+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-12T17:21:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2037,\"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\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-12T17:21:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008 - 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\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-10-12T17:21:22+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-12T17:21:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008"},"wordCount":2037,"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\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008","name":"Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-12T17:21:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/navin-chand-thakur-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-8-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Navin Chand Thakur vs State Of Punjab And Others on 8 August, 2008"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/232892","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=232892"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/232892\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=232892"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=232892"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=232892"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}